Progress, Public Health, and Power: Foucault and the Homemakers' Clubs of Saskatchewan<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De 1911 à 1979, les Homemakers' Clubs de la Saskatchewan ont mobilisé et suivi une étude et une action à grande échelle dans le domaine de la santé publique. Cet article examine comment ces clubs ont poussé des femmes à lutter pour avancer et les ont encouragées à considérer de telles luttes comme étant fondamentales pour bâtir leur propre identité. Les techniques utilisées comprenaient des encouragements à partager des buts, à faire leurs de tels buts, à structurer leur démarche, à rendre compte de leurs pensées et de leurs actions, à récompenser certaines conduites et à lier ces dernières à des causes convaincantes sur le plan émotif. En s'insérant dans un cadre conceptuel foucaldien, cet article apporte une contribution à la compréhension sociologique de la gouvernance et de la formation du sujet. From 1911 to 1979, the Homemakers' Clubs of Saskatchewan mobilized and monitored extensive study and action in the field of public health. This article explores how these clubs exhorted women to strive for progress, and encouraged women to internalize such striving as fundamental to their own identities. The techniques used included encouraging commitment to shared goals, making such goals personal, structuring action, requiring women to report their thoughts and actions, rewarding certain behaviors, and linking those behaviors with emotionally compelling causes. Rooted in a Foucauldian conceptual framework, this article contributes to the sociological understanding of subject formation and governance.
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 | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".