MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004035633 · doi:10.1177/0097700406288317

The Gendered Politics of Woman-work

2006· article· en· W2004035633 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern China · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrassrootsCommunismChinaPolitical radicalismPoliticsPolitical scienceGender studiesSociologyPublic administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores discursive tensions in Party organizations prior to and after the founding of the People's Republic of China. Specifically, it explains radicalism among grassroots women leaders during the Great Leap Forward. The author argues that some of these leaders neglected the health of women and children and even sought to dismantle grassroots women's organizations because of how they were recruited and trained in grassroots Party organizations. Whereas the Chinese Communist Party and the All China Women's Federation (ACWF) leadership sought to implement a Marxist maternalist conception of sexual equality that stressed physiological difference, grass-roots Party organizations operated on the basis of a revolutionary Maoist ethic according to which all were expected to struggle equally. Trained by local Party organizations, a number of rural women leaders identified with interpretations of sexual equality put forth by the local Party, not by the Party and ACWF leadership, and consequently transformed important aspects of woman-work during the late 1950s.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it