Second Class Citizenship: An Examination of Women and Minorities, Victims of the American Welfare State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis provides a fresh look at the relationship between welfare, race and gender, and the value of women's household work. This topic is approached from economic, historical, and Black Studies perspectives. Included is an evaluation of the value of women's household production, by comparing one woman's nominal value of household production to the amount that she receives in welfare, in order to show how society undervalues women's production in the home. There has yet to be a study done that addresses the way in which American society view women's productivity in the home by examining the federal programs established to compensate her for not working. The term compensate is used because we need to start thinking of welfare payments as women's compensation for the work that they do in the home. The history of social welfare policy from the 17th century to the present is examined with a focus on social welfare policies created during the Roosevelt, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan and Clinton administrations, as well as a discussion on the exclusive nature of major social welfare policies that denied access to women and minorities. The effects of race and gender on social welfare policy are also discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".