MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1109829782 · doi:10.3138/cjh.ach.50.2.rev40

<i>Gender History in a Transnational Perspective: Biographies, Networks, Gender Orders</i>, edited by Oliver Janz and Daniel Schönpflug

2015· article· en· W1109829782 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ingrid Sharp

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of History · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)SuffrageSociologyTransnationalismPerspective (graphical)World historyGender studiesGender historyLawPolitical sciencePoliticsHistory

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Gender History in a Transnational Perspective: Biographies, Networks, Gender Orders, edited by Oliver Janz and Daniel Schonpflug. New York, Berghahn Books, 2014. vi, 287 pp. $95.00 US (cloth). Transnational history has grown in importance over the last two decades and has proved particularly fruitful in deepening our understanding of the nature of women's organizations and female activists in the nineteenth and twentieth century. Transnational women's networks took up issues such as gender and social justice, suffrage, and peace that could not be dealt with in the framework of nation states and appealed to something they saw as universal to women. In this context, much attention has been paid to establishing the difference between international and organizations and activism, while recognizing that the two are not mutually exclusive and can coexist within single organizations. This distinction, however fluid, is important as the basis of enquiries into the existence of a human rights discourse within the women's movement at various stages of its historical development. This volume has adopted a broad understanding of transnationalism as a continuation of comparative history and places the emphasis on the perspective of the scholar as much as on the object of enquiry. This has advantages in that it allows the volume to encompass studies of international organizations and ideas, imperial histories as well as individual biographies and offer fresh insights and raise new questions on a range of topics. The volume is in three sections, two of which deal with different aspects of women's history, while the third is dedicated to examination of the gender order in the relationship of Europe to the colonies. Part one discusses women's networks and initiatives, including Karen Offen's reflection on the applicability of the terms transnational and indeed to earlier stages of the women's movement. Her examples show that within an organization like the International Council of Women (icw), a concern with shared aims, shared humanity and a shared identity as women meant that aspects of their work and consciousness were indeed in nature. The importance of the individual as actor is demonstrated by the example of American feminist May Wright Sewell, who served as Vice-president and President of the icw between 1899 and 1904. Offen makes a convincing case that Sewell's international vision, based on the mutual generosity and solidarity of women, transcended national borders and national self-interest. In this, she was far ahead of many of her contemporaries, who remained firmly rooted in their own national contexts. Anne Cova's contribution to this section considers the national councils of the ICW in France, Italy, and Portugal as an effective way of making their political activity visible in nations where women did not have the right to vote. This comparative approach, which brings out differences as well as commonalties, is all the more welcome as scholarship has tended to neglect the councils of Southern Europe. Julie Carlier's contribution on a little-known and short-lived international organization, the International Women's Union (1893-1898), reveals the plurality that characterized the women's movement during the late nineteenth century and shows how solidarity for a particular cause could blur the boundaries between seemingly disparate groups and call into question categories such as moderate and radical. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,985
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,052
Tête enseignante GPT0,275
Écart entre enseignants0,223 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of HistoryMême sujetHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesTravaux en français237 207