Rethinking fat: From bio- to body-becoming pedagogies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article engages with recent critical research on the obesity epidemic to think through the bioethics of current obesity prevention and consider alternative responses to fat bodies. To develop such an approach, it offers a feminist “body becoming” theory of fat that interweaves constructivist and new materialist theories with embodied and aesthetic perspectives to imagine other possibilities for fat embodiment. Thinking beyond conventional biopedagogical interventions that send moralizing messages about what bodies should be, I theorize a “becoming” pedagogy that moves away from enforcing norms toward more creative ways of expanding possibilities for what bodies could become. Because in our boundary-setting world this kind of imagining is considered the work of the artist and not within the purview of the social scientist, I turn to the arts and to aesthetic theory for insight and inspiration in this project. I discuss representations that focus on embodying and materializing change among individuals and groups so as to transform social scripts about body, ability, and normality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".