Critically feminizing family science: Using femme theory to generate novel approaches for the study of families and relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How do values, beliefs, and assumptions about femininity shape relational experiences? To answer this question, we critically feminize family science by applying femme theory to the field. Through this analysis, we present some of the ways that femmephobia (i.e., the systematic devaluation and regulation of femininity across all bodies and identities) is established in childhood and perpetuated throughout various relational contexts across the life course. Specifically, we examine how femmephobia is socialized via families, systematically normalized and perpetuated throughout childhood, and how it shapes gender‐based violence risk, perpetration, and tactics. We demonstrate how femme theory illuminates the importance of disentangling the intersectional axes of gender, sexuality, and gender expression, thereby generating novel approaches for family and relationship science and interventions that promote systemic social change. Subordinating and regulating femininity affects all individuals, making its disruption of critical importance for the prevention of gender‐based violence and the promotion of healthy families and relationships.
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 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 | 0.024 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".