You’re doing it wrong: the governance of motherhood through mommy blogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mommy blog communities have been established by mothers who publish their stories online with the stated purpose to empower themselves and their peers by offering a seemingly unfiltered representation of motherhood. While this benefit has been felt by many readers, there are invisible governing discourses that have prevented such blogs from becoming authentic spaces of resistance to the hegemonic ideals of motherhood. To understand the governing forces placed upon mothers through “mommy blogs,” we explored the question: How is motherhood shaped through narratives (re)presented in mommy blogs? Critical discourse analysis, informed by a governmentality perspective, was used to analyze mommy blog entries to illuminate representations of power and knowledge within the blog entries. The findings suggest that a governmentality perspective is useful in understanding how mommy blogs enact power over mothers using mechanisms of governance through 1) sameness and imperfection, 2) perceived self-compassion, 3) advice and support, and 4) the scientification of motherhood. As more people turn to online communities for support with the experience of mothering, it is important to garner a critical understanding of how mommy blogs continue to influence contemporary experiences of motherhood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".