“Standing Up for Canadian Oil & Gas Families”: Tracing Gender, Family, and Work In the Alberta Petro-economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on the social media content of four pro-oil Facebook groups, we argue that these ‘subsidized publics’ play an increasingly critical role in facilitating oil and gas companies’ continued accumulation of fossil capital. We adopt O’Shaughnessy and Krogman’s (2011) analytical framework to reveal material-discursive contradictions obscured from view in the pages of these online groups. Through deploying gendered and familial discourses, these subsidized publics celebrate traditional gender roles, present oil as a ubiquitous and benevolent force, and blur the divide between oil and gas workers on the one hand, and absentee transnational employers on the other. In an era of advanced neoliberal petro-capitalism, these quasi-public entities are masking the inherently unequal power relationship that exists between the two. Moreover, in projecting a working-class ethos, we argue that these familial and gendered discourses create a homogenizing narrative, advancing the false notion of a “classless and horizontally beneficial” industry (Gaventa, 1982, p. 58). Our analysis disrupts neoliberal representations of de-gendered extraction and highlights the extent to which gender remains a key axis within resource communities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".