Kitchen Kinetics: Women's Movements in Sigrun Bülow-Hübe's Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A principios del siglo XXI Mexico es un escenario abigarrado, donde aumenta diario el reclamo de las muieres por ocupar espacios de participacion en el desarrollo nacional. ..Al the beginning of the 21st century, Mexico is multi-colored scenario, where everyday women's claim to occupy participatory spaces in national development increases....- Marta Lamas (2007, p. 15, authors' translation)Situating the Origin of this Special Edition: Transnational/ International/Global FeminismThe terms transnational/international/global have been increasingly common in feminist scholarly literature in the past 15 years. These expressions are frequently used as synonyms to describe feminist epistemology and praxis that propagate political, social, and academic networks between institutions, groups, and individuals across geographic borders. More recent discussions make an important distinction between transnational feminism and international or feminism, with the latter being specifically associated with scholarly analysis of and political movements around globalization processes (Tohidi, 2005; see also Scott-Dixon, 2004). While international connections among women have been present since the beginning of the feminist movement (for example, the International Women's Suffrage Association), the profound impact of economic, political, and cultural globalization on our social imaginaries and lived experience has led to the proliferation of consciousness - think globally, act locally.According to Tohidi (2005), transnational feminism emerges out of the concept of global sisterhood, as defined by Robin Morgan in the 1980s. The juxtaposition of the critique of the idea of sisterhood by feminists of colour for not taking into account the differences between women, along with the intensification of globalization and its impact on women's lives, has led to the conceptualization of transnational feminism (Mendoza, 2002, cited in Tohidi, 2005) as: a politic of solidarity of feminists around the planet that transcends social class, race, sexuality, and national limits.In provocative essay entitled, Globalizing Feminist Ethics, Alison M. Jaggar (2000) analyzes the notion of globalizing feminist discourse. She argues that there is need to establish feminist dialogue that helps break down stereotypes of women outside of Western culture. Northern and Southern feminists must resolve some difficult issues in order to establish this dialogue, such as who can participate and which perspective should be taken into consideration (insider or outsider?) and which issues should be part of feminist agenda. Jaggar (2000, p. 21 ) contends that it is possible to create an imagined feminist community that seeks constantly to be more inclusive, open, and equal in the pursuit of shared self-conception.Aimee Carrillo Rowe (2008, pp. 176-177), in similar tone, uses the metaphor of power lines in her examination of transnational and multiracial feminist alliances:Power lines are webs of heavy cable that criss-cross the globe. They serve to connect us to one another across time and space. They allow us to communicate with others, to build community, to shape the world within and against power relations. In their absence, no such communication/community would be possible. Power lines empower us by enabling our connectivity. They are human-made structures, part and parcel of colonial modernity. These structures, erected through the blood sweat of colonized labor - these structures of wood and metal and heavy cables that sway in the wind - they dig into the earth. Power lines reflect and produce the uneven material relations that give rise to their tall frames.She poses the question: If our vision is to forge more possible feminism, how will we use power lines? (Carrillo Rowe, 2008, p. 177). Indeed, both Jaggar and Carrillo Rowe raise complex questions and concerns for feminists everywhere. …
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.
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 | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it