Femicide on the Frontier: Analysing Motives Behind the Femicide Crisis in Ciudad Juàrez
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In Western Culture, feminist campaigns have acted as a catalyst behind major societal changes regarding women's rights. Throughout history, feminism has encompassed a range of social and political movements aiming to establish and define equality of the sexes in societies where the male point of view is prioritised, and injustices occur towards women, solely because of their gender. This inequality in turn reinforces harmful gender stereotypes, roles and dynamics. Although this advocacy primarily focuses on women's rights, many feminists argue for the inclusion of men's liberation as men are also harmed by the perpetuation of traditional gender roles within themselves, which holds the power to harm women if these roles are broken. Feminist efforts fight to change such marginalising constraints. However, this fight is far from over – especially in Ciudad Juàrez, a Mexican border city experiencing a femicidal crisis where women are being murdered solely because they are women. This is likely due to toxic machismo and marianismo reinforcing the women's lack of rights to body autonomy and free thought. This chapter analyses and examines the many potential contributing factors to these heinous acts such as drug trafficking, organised crime, the emergence of the maquila industry and sociocultural factors like gender roles, and how these factors result in women being othered and viewed as deviant to their society which is so deeply rooted in traditional Catholicism and the gender roles that often apply to those who practice within the area. This notion of deviance ostracises and demonises women who are simply trying to get by, labelling them as monsters in their own society solely for breaking traditional gender roles.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".