<i>‘I wouldn’t take the risk of the attention, you know? Just a lone girl biking’</i>: examining the gendered and classed embodied experiences of cycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper frames the embodied experience of bicycling using theories of performativity and materiality. In doing so, the paper provides insights into embodied processes that regulate the gendered and classed cycling body across age. Drawing from interviews completed with newcomers to Toronto enrolled in a bicycle mentorship program, this paper highlights how context-specific social norms exist around who is read as cycling appropriately. Two norms consistently discussed are that cycling can be at odds with femininity and that it is a symbol of poverty. These norms act as discursive regulatory frameworks for gender and class performativity. Cycling can also be an experience of ‘intense embodiment’ in that it can bring the absent body back into consciousness. This experience is dynamic and elicits diverse emotions. Furthermore, cycling is not only found to increase people’s awareness of their materiality, but also their bodily fluids challenge the notion of ‘secure’ bodily boundaries. These material processes can be gendered and/or classed, and can affect access to mobility and public space. By studying identity formation processes as they relate to cycling, this paper sheds light on the power-laden underpinnings of identity-based differences in cycling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".