MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415813155 · doi:10.4324/9781003640837-9

Stigmatized (M)others

2025· book-chapter· en· W4415813155 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Lesley Annett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationPaid workWork (physics)Working lifePropositionUnpaid workReproductionWorking hours

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the expectation for mothers to participate in the paid labour market while also fulfilling unpaid responsibilities at home, working mothers are subject to “the burden of a double shift, that is, the burden of a life built exclusively on work” (51). This chapter examines the narrated and photographic experiences of 14 sex working mothers in Canada, with the overarching question: “How do these womxn navigate and negotiate the daily work of social reproduction and paid work in precarious conditions?” The chapter argues that the motivations of participants, as complexly positioned workers within capitalism, to pursue sex work are reflective of antiwork tendencies and Kathi Weeks’ proposition for a postwork society. Participants stress their occupational choice as best enabling them to negotiate some of the traditional constraints of working motherhood – granting some participants financial security, greater flexibility, fewer working hours compared to traditional full-time occupations, refusal to overwork, and/or having greater leisure time to invest in themselves and their families. In doing so, this chapter aims to expand current debates on sex work, working motherhood, and anti-capitalist ideologies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.007

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSex work and related issues→French-language works237,207→