Complicating Childhood: Gender, Ethnicity, and “Disadvantage” within the New Zealand Children's Health Camps Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the mid-20th century New Zealand's children's health camps movement had gained the status of a national icon, highlighting children's health and well-being in a campaign unrivalled, before the 1960s, by any equivalent peace-time cause. The movement's long existence within a relatively small nation state with an increasingly vocal indigenous population makes it an ideal base from which to study challenges to the undifferentiated category of "the child." The success of the movement was based upon a highly unitary conception of childhood and an uncomplicated view of child health. The paper shows how at certain moments in the movement's development a blanket categorization of childhood was challenged, first by gender and later, and more substantially, by the ethnicity of health camp recruits. "Disadvantage" was a constant subtext, but its link with socio-economic status was downplayed in official discourses. Gender was highlighted in the 1920s and 1930s when girls' health needs were informed by (White) racial anxieties. Thereafter the physical and mental health needs of boys underwrote health camp recruitment and programs, even if this was not formally acknowledged. From the late 1980s, however, gender was subordinated to ethnicity. A growing focus on the Treaty of Waitangi issues and relationships of Maori to social services saw Maori children become visible in New Zealand's health camps as never before. With an acknowledgement of difference came competition for funds and an undermining of the national consensus about child health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".