From Scientific Motherhood to Intensive Mothering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rich and complex history of childrearing practices most often coalesces around women's behaviour. Because women are imagined as best suited to perform the work of childrearing, maternal behaviour has long been the subject of state, public and academic scrutiny. Although the definitions and expectations of motherhood change with the times and advancements characteristic of a particular era, one consistency has been the construction of mothers as primarily responsible for preparing children as future citizens, ensuring that they grow up to be responsible, contributing members of society. This construction is particularly salient as transformations in the way we view childhood shift the way we understand childrearing (Faircloth, 2014a). Parenting is now a task, ‘a form of learned interaction’ that determines children's success or failure (Lee, 2014, p. 8). In this recent history of the emergence of parenting as a task, there are two key ideologies that help to contextualize the rise of AP. The first is scientific motherhood, the dominant framing for ‘good’ motherhood in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the UK and Canada, and the second is intensive mothering, the cultural contradictions of which define contemporary parenting culture. Scientific motherhood Scientific motherhood is ‘the idea that mothering should be guided by scientific supervision and principles’ (Litt, 2000, p. 21). Although the ideology first emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the notion that science is best suited to inform parenting has continued to define what we call ‘good’ motherhood, evident for example, in the current reliance on neuroscience to shape parenting (Lowe et al, 2015). The emergence of scientific motherhood coincided with the arrival of ‘scientism’ (Wilkie, 2003, p. 177) in European and North American societies, during which major scientific innovations such as the discovery of germ theory completely transformed the way everyday people, particularly mothers, lived their lives. This discovery, and scientism in general, enabled the emergence of preventative medicine and thus began the first indication of medical interest in the behaviour and habits of mothers. Physicians’ newfound interest in mothering behaviour reflected a larger cultural phenomenon that emerged alongside and as a result of scientism: medicalization. Medicalization is ‘the process through which medical interpretations have acquired cultural legitimacy’ (Litt, 2000, p. 4) to the exclusion of other explanations. This process is most clearly evident in the shifts in the customs of childbirth over the past 300 years (Stone, 2009).
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 | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".