Constituting the Punishable Woman. Atavistic Man Incarcerates Postmodern Woman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews feminist and non-feminist knowledge claims on the punishment of women from 1970 to 2000, linking the incarceration spiral to conceptual, ideological, economic and political shifts in western societies overall. It argues, first, that the knowledge claims of critical criminology-a designation that includes feminist criminology-are components of the incarceration spiral, and that this factor must be fed back into analyses of the knowledge/power equation. The paper examines how constructions of women developed by claims makers in feminist criminology have structured the ways in which women are now punished. Second, this means that the claims of all the variants of criminology, from right realist to critical and postmodern, are complicit in the surge of punitiveness that characterizes the modern industrialized state. However, to understand the woman of punishable discourse constituted through criminal law today, one must look beyond academe and ask not what discourses are produced, but what discourses are heard, by politicians, the public, and criminal justice professionals. This shifts the analytical focus from deconstruction to political economy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".