Feminist Representation(s) of Women Living on Welfare: The Case of Workfare and the Erosion of Volunteer Time*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article veut en premier démontrer comment l'interprétation féministe des besoins des femmes dans le contexte du travail obligatoire repose sur plusieurs interrelations au sein des groupes communautaires, puis que ces interrelations surviennent dans le contexte d'une politique publique qui a pour effet de transformer le travail volontaire et le temps volontaire à l'intérieur du secteur communautaire en exigeant que les femmes qui vivent de l'aide sociale transforment ce travail en travail obligatoire et en demandant que les groupes communautaires acceptent des placements de travail obligatoire, ce qui a pour effet de remplacer les travailleuses volontaires et de changer le sens donnéà leur travail lui‐même. L'article se termine sur une discussion à propos du statut intermédiaire des groupes de femmes et sur l'évolution de la représentation des besoins particuliers des femmes dans la sphère publique/politique. This article intends to show, first, how feminist interpretations of women's needs in the context of workfare are formed through social interactions within community groups. Second, we demonstrate that these interactions are happening within a context of a public policy that is reshaping volunteer work and volunteer time within the community sector by requiring that women living on welfare transform their volunteer work into compulsory work and by asking community groups to accept workfare placements, which result in the displacement of volunteer workers and transform the meaning of volunteer work itself. The article ends with a discussion on the intermediary status of women's groups, as well as the evolution of women's needs representation within the public/political sphere.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".