Foodwork or Foodplay? Men’s Domestic Cooking, Privilege and Leisure
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Market research documents a rising passion for cooking among men. Yet, some feminists argue that men see cooking as ‘leisure’ in part because they have distance from day-to-day care obligations. However, empirical research on men’s home cooking is still limited. This article investigates the relationship between cooking and leisure among 30 Canadian men with significant household cooking responsibilities. Drawing on interview, observational and diary data, and poststructural conceptualizations of leisure, I ask, to what extent do these men understand cooking as leisure and why? Opposing the notion that women’s cooking is ‘work’ and men’s, ‘leisure’, I find that these men experience cooking as ‘work-leisure’ complicated by worries about others’ preferences, health and approval. However, I also argue that participants create leisurely cooking by manipulating cooking spaces and time(s), and it is in the ease with which they do so that gender (as well as class and race) hierarchies become more visible.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it