Understanding Gender Backlash: Southern Perspectives
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
Far from seeing continued steady progress on gender equality, we are currently witnessing significant backlash against gender and sexual rights. Limited and hard-fought gains for some are being reversed, co-opted, and dismantled – all amplified through new social media and digital technologies. This issue of the IDS Bulletin addresses the urgent question of how we can better understand the recent swell of anti-gender backlash. Perspectives from Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Kenya, Lebanon, Uganda, and the UK detail examples of anti-gender backlash in different contexts, and the actors, interests, and tactics involved. The articles here present critical perspectives for framing and interpreting a global phenomenon not yet well understood. The IDS Bulletin starts by grouping the issues discussed into three themes: voice and tactics; framings and direction; and temporality and structure. The authors explore the features of the recent and current wave of backlash that include increased authoritarianism, religious resurgence, populist hyper-nationalism, and the concurrence of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and transphobia. Along the way the articles also point to connections with parallel debates in development, contributing to nudging this topic out of the ‘gender and development corner’. The set of complementary viewpoints on the framing and theorising of backlash presented in this issue is also intended to contribute to scholarship by attending to an increasingly recognised gap in research. By presenting new ways of analysing and countering backlash from more diverse settings, this issue of the IDS Bulletin calls for the development of better strategies and tactics for resistance and reclaiming gender justice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.082 |
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