MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403775561 · doi:10.1080/14680777.2024.2418381

From “Big White” army to White Paper Protests: China’s gendered pandemic war and feminist interventions

2024· article· en· W4403775561 on OpenAlexaff
Chenzi Feng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminist Media Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)ChinaPandemicPsychological interventionPolitical scienceWhite paperGender studiesMedia studiesCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SociologyPsychologyLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many nation-states adopted militarized measures for rapid containment. China notably implemented extreme and enduring war-like procedures. This study aims to explore the implications of securitizing the pandemic through a feminist lens and suggest ethical and equitable strategies for understanding emergencies and coping with future crises. Employing discourse-based online ethnography, it analyzes social dynamics in China’s “pandemic war,” examining how gender and (in)security are co-constructed and the role of feminist activism within an authoritarian context. This article argues that framing the pandemic as war reinforces a masculinist stance of dominance, prioritizing state stability over human rights and security. State-centric securitization perpetuates state authority, gendered social hierarchies, and structural violence. The exclusionary nature of this approach created new avenues for feminist activism, both online and offline, advocating for marginalized groups, raising social and gender awareness, challenging state narratives, and fostering collective resistance. Drawing lessons from Chinese feminist initiatives during COVID-19, this study calls for alternative crisis responses focused on care, equity, ethics, and collaboration.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFeminist Media StudiesSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207