Preserving Domesticity: Reading Tupperware in Women's Changing Domestic, Social and Economic Roles*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'image représentée par Tupperware est essentiellement féminine. Cet article analyse la littérature entourant Tupperware pour y retrouver cette image de la fémininité de classe moyenne, euronord‐américaine et domestique. L'analyse de cette littérature se fait en tenant compte des changements et continuités, au cours des 50 dernières années, des rôles domestiques, économiques et sociaux des femmes nord‐américaines. Ces rôles domestiques et économiques se sont entrelacés, ce qui a permis à L'entreprise de mieux les exploiter. La réussite de Tupperware en s'associant à cette image très précise peut servir comme baromètre pour révéler comment les femmes négocient les pressions combinées de la maison et du travail. Tupperware projects a quintessentially gendered image. This article explores writings by and about Tupperware to discover its representation of middle‐class white domestic femininity. This image is read against changes and continuities in North American women's domestic, economic and social roles over the past fifty years. There has been an ongoing intertwining of women's domestic and paid work roles that Tupperware has been able to exploit. The enduring success of Tupperware as a company associated with a specific image is thus a useful barometer indicating how women are contending with the combined pressures of home and work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".