Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article builds on existing feminist critiques of transnational debt regimes and austerity politics in order to theorise a new conception of reproductive debt. This involves critiquing debt burdens imposed upon people who reproduce, as a consequence of global restructuring programmes, cuts to social services and the increasing financialisation of reproduction. In place of individualised obligations to financial lenders, I argue that we all owe an infinite debt to those who reproduce, in order to ensure that reproduction is possible when desired and that its necessary conditions – social, cultural and environmental – are supported. This theory of reproductive debt draws on the 1970s Wages for Housework movement, feminist literature on reproductive labour and Kathi Weeks’ post-work politics. It also explores Patty Chang's video exhibition Milk Debt, which was inspired by David Graeber's discussion of the Chinese Buddhist tenet of ‘milk debt’: the infinite kindness of mothers, exemplified by the practice of breastfeeding, which can never be repaid. Recognising the negative impacts of environmental damage and histories of slavery and colonialism on reproduction, reproductive debt is understood as an infinite, non-quantifiable obligation that is the basis for our shared existence on this planet.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".