An intersectional theoretical framework for exploring racialized older immigrant women’s subjectivities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Today, racialized older women’s international migration is increasingly accelerated, cyclical and transnational, illustrating the transcendence of lives across time and space. At the same time, immigration regimes regulate and restrict these seemingly unfettered mobilities using neoliberal, gendered and ageist policies that favor (younger) skilled immigration. This article addresses the question of how social work can use intersectionality perspectives to theorize racialized older immigrant women’s lives which are stretched across multiple time(s) and space(s) yet confined within highly regulated multi-tiered immigration systems. Findings This article outlines a theoretical framework grounded specifically within intersectional feminist, post-structural, and transnational aging perspectives. The framework embraces the temporality, spatiality, and transnationality of gendered, aging and migrant lives and reconsiders their agency as a performed subjectivity bound by multiple forces of institutionalized regimes. Applications This theoretical framework moves social work inquiry to a richer understanding of the migratory realities of diverse aging lives that are simultaneously in-motion and regulated within structural constraints.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".