MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404432121 · doi:10.1086/732839

Can we wash away love with bleach? Affect, gender, and agency in Western Amazonia

2024· article· en· W4404432121 on OpenAlexaff
Magda Helena Dziubinska

Bibliographic record

VenueHau Journal of Ethnographic Theory · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropological Studies and Insights
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueÉcole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Amazon rainforestBleachAgency (philosophy)PsychologyGender studiesSociologyChemistryCommunicationEcologyBiologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although some Kakataibo women say that their elders did not know romantic love and that they learned it only recently by going to the city, that romantic love is actually having a hard time taking root in Indigenous Amazonia. This article explores some aspects of affectivity based on Amazonian women’s discourses and experiences of love and conjugality. Using an analytical framework of the anthropology of affects, I argue that to understand Indigenous uneasiness about passionate love as a voluntary, sublimated, and symmetrical relationship, love needs to be approached in terms of control exerted by one person over another. The ethnography of sensible experiences related to love and desire, in which women often occupy the place of prey, sheds light not only on the relational dimension of the affect and on the feminine interpretation of a lived world permeated by power relations, but it also allows us to add some nuance to the Indigenous conception of gender and the underlying notion of agency.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueHau Journal of Ethnographic TheorySame topicAnthropological Studies and InsightsFrench-language works237,207