MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115687927 · doi:10.18740/s42k57

Feminist Mothering: Challenging Gender Inequality by Resisting the Institution of Motherhood and Raising Children to be Critical Agents of Social Change.

2009· article· en· W2115687927 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fiona Joy Green

Bibliographic record

VenueSocialist studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatriarchyGender studiesSociologyFeminismInstitutionResistance (ecology)Feminist philosophySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In spite of the significant contributions of feminists to feminist theorizing and research on motherhood and mothering, only a few scholars are paying attention to the analysis of the potential of feminist mothering as a site of women’s strength and resistance to patriarchy and as a location of revolutionary activism. This article explores how the work of conscious feminist mothers can empower women to break free from the rules of patriarchal motherhood to create their own models of mothering and, in turn, practice the invaluable work of rearing children to be active conscientious citizens for social justice. Excerpts from several interviews with sixteen self-identified feminist mothers, conducted for a larger research project on feminist mothering, provide concrete examples of how having a feminist consciousness transform the work of mothering into both a “rewarding, disciplined expression of conscience” proposed by Ruddick, and a location of active social change theorized by Chodorow (1978) and Rich (1986)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.053
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocialist studiesSame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207