Engendering migration in the transnational world: highly skilled Korean immigrant women in the Canadian labour market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how globalization and neoliberal restructuring shape Korean women's migration to Canada and how race structures women's settlement experiences post-migration. Anti-racist feminism and post-colonial theories are used as the theoretical framework. Based on in-depth interviews with twenty-five skilled Korean women who have been in Canada less than five years, this study explores individual motives for migration as located within the broader macro structures of globalization, especially as developed following the South Korean monetary crisis of 1997 or "IMF crisis." Especially, this paper observes how neo-liberal restructuring and the colonial project of the West interplay with women's agency to influence women's decisions to migrate to Canada. The study participants were often exposed to feminism and other social justice issues as students, but as educated members of the urban middle-class, were also concerned to maintain the class status of themselves and their families. Many chose immigration to counter the middle-class insecurity of the post-IMF era. Migrating to Canada became the solution to the perceived inequities of South Korean society. Among these inequities was gender inequity; many of the study participants imagined Canada to relatively free of such problems. However, as this study explores, rather than escape such gender inequity, the study participants experienced racialization and de-skilling in the Canadian labour market; as women, they did not escape gender inequity but suffered the double discrimination of racialized gender discrimination. Indeed, deskilling forced many of the study participants into a more "feminine" family structure than formerly. Thus, this study also explores the dynamics with the family, as the study participants negotiate changed gender relations with their spouses at home, and within the contested site of the Korean community in Toronto. Finally, this study discusses how the participants exercise their agency in responding to the post-migration barriers, organizing themselves do deal with the racialized barriers of the labour market.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".