MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

What to do with the “Tubby Hubby”?“Obesity,” the Crisis of Masculinity, and the Nuclear Family in Early Cold War Canada

2009· article· en· W2023300226 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Deborah McPhail

Bibliographic record

VenueAntipode · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsWomen's and Gender Studies et Recherches FéministesWomen's College HospitalYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMasculinityRhetoricObesityWhite (mutation)Gender studiesNuclear familySociologyPolitical scienceLawMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Despite current insistence that obesity is a new problem, obesity and fat were discussed frequently in the medical and popular presses and by state officials during the early Cold War in Canada. Using Kristeva's (1982, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection) concept of abjection, I argue that Cold War anxieties about fat, and specifically the obesity of white, middle‐class men, had less to do with the growing girth of bodies than it did with a post‐war crisis in masculinity related to the collapse of the public and private spheres. Through an analysis of fitness regimes and female‐administered diets for men, I argue that anti‐obesity rhetoric served to assuage dominant worries about degenerating masculinity by reasserting both the gendered division of labour and the white, middle‐class, nuclear family as Canadian norms.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0360.031
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntipodeSame topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207