Constituting "Asian women": Canadian gendered orientalism and multicultural nationalism in an age of "Asia rising."
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines how the Canadian nation state produces itself as both global and national through the bodies of Asian women. Focusing on the turn of the twenty-first century, it explores the parameters and frameworks in which women of Asian heritage are both incorporated as representatives of the Canadian nation, and disqualified from and included in the Canadian national imaginary as Asian women. It does so by analyzing three disparate events in which Asian women and issues of race, gender, and citizenship figured prominently: the unwelcomed arrival of approximately 600 "illegal" Chinese migrant women, children and men on four boats off the coast of British Columbia in the summer of 1999; the much desired migration of and extraordinary concern over the assaults of Asian women and girls temporarily in British Columbia to study English in the summer and fall of 2002; and the controversy over the appointment of Chinese Canadian Adrienne Clarkson as Canada's governor general from 1999 to 2005. Through these events I aim to show how western representations of Asians as "foreign labour", "foreign enemy" and "foreign capital" are gendered female as well as male. Defined as foreigners that need to be expelled as well as ideal subjects that should be welcomed, how does gender affect the contemporary ambivalence towards Asians in Canada? Apparently contradictory, I argue that dominant power structures are produced through ambivalence. Each case study reveals that Asian women are constructed in various ways in order to support both multicultural nationalism and the advancement of Canada's position in the Asia Pacific/China century. Seemingly contradictory, this research highlights the multiple ways that the processes of envelopment and abjection are imposed onto dissimilar Asian women made disparate by uneven processes of white settler colonialism and global capitalism. Thus, this research contributes to a larger body of work that inquires into how issues of difference are managed in western multicultural nation states in the neoliberal moment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".