Gendering Fashion, Fashioning Fur: On the (re)production of a Gendered Labor Market within a Craft Industry in Transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What are the implications of the new economy for gender equality in labor markets? Does an economy that privileges ‘immaterial’ labor (the production of ideas) over ‘material’ labor (the manual production of goods) signal the possibility for greater labor market inclusion? Building on critical accounts of the new economy, I examine the bases for continued gender hierarchies through an analysis of the contemporary restructuring of the fur industry in Canada. As a traditional craft industry, fur has sought to adapt to new-economy imperatives by incorporating ‘immaterial’ labor in the form of fashion design. However, these efforts have been limited, as the (predominantly male) fur manufacturers have sought to retain authority in a changing economy by integrating design as a subordinate activity—a subordination made possible through a coding of design as feminine and through the deployment of the fashion designer as a flexible source of labor. Drawing on interviews with manufacturers, designers, and other industry actors, I analyze how new-economy imperatives intersect with local institutional practices and ideologies to reproduce a gendered labor market.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".