MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582976924

Women’s Lives and Livelihoods in Post-Soviet Uzbekistan: Ceremonies of Empowerment and Peacebuilding

2016· article· en· W2582976924 on OpenAlex
Élizabeth G. Cohen

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian women's studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoviet and Russian History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender studiesScholarshipEmpowermentLivelihoodSociologyPeacebuildingAgency (philosophy)PatriarchyPovertyPolitical scienceSocial sciencePolitical economyGeographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WOMEN'S LIVES AND LIVELIHOODS IN POSTSOVIET UZBEKISTAN: CEREMONIES OF EMPOWERMENT AND PEACEBUILDING Zulfiya Tursunova Lanham, md: Lexington Books, 2014 Joining an expanding literature on women in post-Soviet states, this book about Central Asia uncovers a women's seldom visible in euro/north American scholarship. The book began as a dissertation completed, far from the author's native Uzbekistan, at the University of Manitoba in the program in peace and conflict studies. With participant observer and interview-based research in two regions--Khorezm in the west and the Tashkent district in the east--Tursunova focuses on rural women and their livelihoods since independence in 1991. Economies are important, but the author is most interested in the local matrices of social relations and cultural resources that support women's work. Tracing the fine structure of their lives, she attends carefully not only to patterns but also to varieties of individual experience. She also seeks women's own voices in narratives, although only a few tell stories and many speak in disembodied fragments. Overall, Tursunova develops a nuanced argument that social and cultural practices from an earlier time still underpin the agency of rural women in a contemporary era of rapid transition. Along the way, she invites us to re-examine the universal applicability of some tenets of world feminisms. Although Tursunova uses the language of patriarchy in characterizing constraints that women face, her principal critical tool is the model of colonization. Calling her subjects, like herself, indigenous, she writes of mostly Turkic-speaking people whose kin worked these lands prior to the arrival of the heavy-handed Russians, first imperial from the 1860s, and then, after 1917, Soviet. Concerning cultural visions of the past, Tursunova lumps Russian with other European commentators who, in orientalizing mode, discounted rural women as backward obstacles to modernization. Yet modernization also had its Uzbeki proponents, the Jadids, who supported Russian-instigated campaigns against veiling and seclusion from the late nineteenth century. From the perspective of rural women, though, the author renders these novelties as foreign impositions. Nevertheless, without presuming, wrongly, that harem women had no agency, it is hard to imagine twenty-first-century rural womens self-directed strategizing, that the author spotlights, without the colonizers' previous introduction of some modernizing changes. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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