‘You’re 16…you should probably be on the pill’: Girls, the non-reproductive body, and the rhetoric of self-control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper I explore the ways that the use of the pill and the ideal of the non-reproductive body intersect within the unique context of girls as subjects in contemporary Canadian society. Analysis draws on a series of twenty-seven qualitative interviews conducted in Montreal as part of my doctoral research with young Canadian women currently taking the pill. I found that women are expected to exercise choice, even though they have access to very few options. However, this disjuncture is even more marked when the subject in question is a young woman due to the intersection of youth, gender, and sexuality, which produces a more complicated practice of freedom because the boundaries of subjectivity are in flux. The pill is a manifestation of an ethic of rational preventative self-care. While we might embrace these technologies of freedom for how they provide increased control over the body, the material point is that in using technologies like the pill young women enter into complex social systems and relationships that paradoxically limit their autonomy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".