MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410510337 · doi:10.1002/dvr2.70029

Bloody Frontier Politics: Menstrual Equity, Military Inclusion, and the Canadian Workplace

2025· article· en· W4410510337 on OpenAlexaffabout
Danica Facca, Arun Jacob

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity & Inclusion Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceGrassrootsGender studiesPoliticsPublic administrationSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT With its roots in second‐wave feminism and entrance into the limelight during the mid‐2010s, the “menstrual equity movement” continues to garner global momentum through combined efforts of grassroots activism, academic research, and social media, which has resulted in legislative and policy (re)formation across many contexts, inclusive of public and private workplace sectors. Critical menstrual studies scholars (Bobel & Fahs, 2020) have raised concerns about how this movement and related policy and legal reforms have become narrowly synonymous with reducing economic barriers to accessing menstrual products, rather than transforming cultural attitudes surrounding menstruation altogether. Within Canada, grassroots activism for menstrual equity has led to legislative changes nationwide (Weiss‐Wolf, 2017). As of December 2023, the Canadian federal government amended the Canada Labour Code (SOR/2023‐78) to mandate the provision of free menstrual products to employees across all federally regulated workplaces as a means to ‘improve equity, reduce stigma, and create healthier, more inclusive workplaces.’ Yet while this legislative change appears to be progressively centering menstrual health as a matter of DEI workplace policy, it remains set against a larger historical backdrop of feminist inquiry that has and continues to explore tensions of menstrual products and hormonal contraceptives, which are used to conceal and suppress menstruation, as both technologies of control and empowerment. In light of these complexities, we argue that menstrual equity policy and related DEI discourse within militarized institutions, as federally regulated workplaces, function as mechanisms of soft coercion which discipline assigned female at birth (AFAB) soldiers into alignment with masculine ideals of the soldier‐worker under the guise of “inclusion.” We examine how menstrual concealment and suppression technologies are made available to AFAB soldiers as military technological solutions for occupational health that simultaneously expand participation and reinforce cultural beliefs that menstruation is a logistical problem to be minimized and/or erased in service of operational readiness.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.042
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversity & Inclusion ResearchSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207