Negotiating Conflict between Personal Desires and Others' Expectations in Lives of Gujarati Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A substantial body of literature in psychological anthropology has challenged the stereotypical depiction of South Asian women as passive subordinates in patriarchal families, and has provided accounts of these women as actors in their social world. Focusing specifically on situations of interpersonal conflict in this article, I analyze the narratives of Gujarati women from two cohorts, daughters‐in‐law in Gujarat, India and mothers‐in‐law in Gujarati immigrant families in Canada, to argue that these women actively engage in negotiating the conflict between their wishes and others' expectations. The mode of agency that they exercise is less egocentric and more relational—the decision making and negotiations occur within the parameters of their familial roles, rather than rebellion against family structures, and their actions are driven by motivations involving the welfare of their children and grandchildren, rather than “individualistic” desires. These narratives, along with ethnographic works exploring South Asian personhood, call for the need to broaden the conceptualization of agency, and challenge the appropriateness of traditional individualistic feminism in understanding the lives of women globally. [India, women, personhood, agency, interpersonal conflict]
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".