MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407560496 · doi:10.1093/isagsq/ksaf004

New Opportunities, Rising Constraints: Assessing the Gendered Opportunity Structure of Myanmar’s Resistance Movement

2024· article· en· W4407560496 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Studies Quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOpportunity structuresPolitical opportunityContext (archaeology)Gender equalityResistance (ecology)PoliticsPolitical scienceIntersectionalityGender studiesFeminismCorporate governanceWork (physics)Movement (music)Feminist movementSociologySocial movementPolitical economyBusinessGeographyEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In a global context of rising right-wing governance, feminist and gender equality actors are facing the reversal of hard-won gains and the deterioration of what they view to be the conditions for advancing gender equality. While these shifts are not failures of feminism, they do represent devastating setbacks that fundamentally challenge the strategies and tactics of gender equality movements. In response, gender equality actors are joining with a range of others in broad resistance coalitions, often with regime change goals. Although this is a common strategy of gender equality actors under similar political conditions, scholars do not typically analyze how joining with these broad coalitions impacts opportunities to work on gender equality. In other words, it is not common to examine within-movement opportunity structures and how gender equality actors are impacted by them. To contribute to addressing this gap, in this article I build on the concept of “gendered opportunity structure” to analyze the within-movement gender dynamics of Myanmar’s resistance movement and how gender equality actors are responding to them. My findings indicate that, while the current gendered opportunity structure of the movement provides some openings for the expanded participation of individual well-established gender equality actors and gender-diverse people, critical shifts in the within-movement opportunity structure have had the net effect of narrowing the objectives and strategies of gender equality actors. Via this case analysis, I propose that the concept “within-movement gendered opportunity structure” may be generative in helping scholars and practitioners better think about how gender equality actors are enabled and constrained by joining heterogeneous resistance movements. This concept, along with the suggested framework and model of analysis worked through in this article, could be adapted for analysis of other relevant cases. More consistent casework on the experiences of gender equality actors within broad-based resistance movements would help build knowledge about the conditions under which resistance movements of this kind may support gender equality outcomes.

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 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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.290 · 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