Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender violence is characterized by its persistent ubiquity, yet feminist theorists are challenged with naming this prevalence without granting gender violence an overdetermining quality or playing into tired tropes of feminine weakness. As a means of thinking through gender violence in its nontotalizing ubiquity, its specificities, and in the ways in which it resisted, this piece applies the feminist political economy concept of “social reproduction.” Kendra Strauss writes that social reproduction refers to the “the varied processes involved in maintaining and reproducing individuals and societies over time.” It is paid and unpaid labor that is usually feminized and often performed by women. Recognizing the crucial role of social reproduction in making and maintaining life, I argue that, as a set of social relations necessary to capital and yet shaped inside and outside of its logics, social reproduction is a liminal space, a place of day-to-day resistance to dominant material and ideological systems of power. As a site of liminality, social reproduction is a locus of struggle, a site of gender violence and resistance in ongoing processes of capital accumulation. This liminal and transgressive quality helps to explain the extreme and persistent violence targeting these labors and the feminized bodies that perform them while at the same time honoring their creative resistance to the totalizing impulses of capital.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".