Leisure and Gender: Challenges and Opportunities for Feminist Research
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The centrality of gender as an organizing principle of leisure practice has been the focus of a considerable body or research conducted over the past couple of decades (for example, Deem, 1986; Wimbush and Talbot, 1988; Henderson et al., 1996; Wearing, 1998). Researchers revealed how gender relates not only to leisure activities and behaviours, but also to the experiences and meanings of leisure in everyday life. The gender stereotyping of activities, evident in many realms of leisure practice, was shown to be associated with gendered opportunities, constraints, and patterns of time use. Men’s time was seen as segmented with often a clear differentiation between work and non-work, and men seemed to have a greater availability of leisure activities and relaxation. The more holistic nature of women’s lives, despite dramatic increases in labour market participation of some groups of women in the later years of the twentieth century, was seen to reflect women’s caregiving roles, family responsibilities, and the lack of access to leisure that was free of socially prescribed obligations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it