Supply, Secrecy, and Surveillance: Experiences of Women who use Cannabis for Pleasure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to examine the nature of the relationships that exist between women and their use of cannabis. Currently, women’s use of cannabis is legally permitted within a federal, medical system of access; however, cannabis’ consumption outside of that framework is categorized as a criminal act. As a result, women are subjected to differing forms of cannabis stigmatization and surveillance across many socio-political contexts, often resultant in women’s losses of power and position. As Canada prepares to enact a legal cannabis framework, it is crucial that society and institutions understand the relationships which women have developed through cannabis use. Otherwise, the legalization of cannabis use will not -- in and of itself -- alleviate the systemic forms of stigmatization and oppression which continue to impact the lives of certain women because of their use of cannabis. A review of existing literature demonstrated that there is limited research which discusses the nature of women’s use of cannabis outside of a medical context. Using postmodern feminist and intersectional analysis, I conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews with six women to gain insights into their experiences of using cannabis. Contrary to the medical and/or criminal cannabis discourse, the women’s stories reveal examples of unique and overlapping instances of cannabis use which differed from the traditional cannabis dichotomy. The findings of the women’s interviews create an alternative cannabis discourse, in which women’s use of cannabis is experienced as a fluid, multi-functional act with effects that satisfy experiences differently across diverse iv contexts, which extends our existing knowledge base. In relation to existing social work policies and practices, the finding implications are discussed. Ultimately, the thesis identifies opportunities for collaboration between social work and women, many of which could serve to disrupt the perpetuation of women’s stigmatization and surveillance in a legal cannabis framework.
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 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".