The Technology of Sexual and Language Power resulting in Captivity in Margaret Atwood’s Handmaid’s Tale: Foucauldian Reading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Margaret Atwood‟s The Handmaid’s Tale provokes inevitably the restricted edicts as the new Christian government‟s extreme policies burst forth as bitter and sardonic for the suppression of women. It is a dystopian nightmare which subjugates and subdues women to the point of sexual slavery, [language] impacts and indoctrinates them in a psychologically-damaging manner, and denies them the basic freedoms which most women in Western civilization take for granted (Porfert 1). Atwood shows the intimate and political relation of previous society to the existing one which Foucault includes in his theory. She shows the well-established foundation of Gilead through the discourse and sexuality in a critical mood. She further shows that language and even sexuality in the frames of discourses have great power to penetrate deeply which triggers off in controlling physical, spiritual and even human thought of individuals within the mechanism of the society. Thus the present essay shows how language and sexuality as two higher elements can overlap with power to affirm the suppression. This is done through Foucault‟s approach.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".