Farmwomen's Discourses on Family Food Provisioning: Gender, Healthism, and Risk Avoidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the dominant discourses utilized by 21 farmwomen with children in three regions of Canada in relation to their talk of household food provisioning. We define food provisioning as the acquisition, preparation, and consumption of food that draws on personal, family, and community resources and supports. Farmwomen expressed their position as gatekeeper of the family meal through traditional gender role discourses. Feeding their families was constructed as a task that determined the health of their family members; it reflects the dominance of a healthism discourse wherein being “healthy” is the desired end that is constructed to be under the control of the individual (mother/wife). Farmwomen's description of farming practices relied heavily on the dominant discourse of food safety/risk avoidance, which they used to justify a protectionist orientation to agriculture. Although uniquely positioned to express a dual consumer/producer role, farmwomen instead spoke of an individualistic orientation to health as consumers, and employed system-oriented discourses of the food safety system as producers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".