Introduction - Calling for Change: Women, Law and the Legal Profession
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In 1993, the Canadian Bar Association [CBA] Task Force on Gender Equality in the Legal Profession, headed by the Honourable Bertha produced the first national examination of the situation of women lawyers in Canada. Touchstones for Change: Equality, Diversity and Accountability generated accolades and denunciations from within and outside the profession. It also generated momentum for change. In March 2004, to mark the ten-year anniversary of Touchstones and in recognition of International Women's Day, the Shirley Greenberg Professorship in Women and the Legal Profession and the Human Rights Research and Education Centre co-sponsored a one day conference at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law.The conference Re-Imagining Touchstones: The Wilson Report Ten Years on and Counting; Re-Visiting the Issues and Re-Thinking the Questions/ Repenser Les Assises de la reform: retour sur les questions soulevees une decennie et plus apres la rapport Wilson, was designed to reassess not only the status of women within the profession but also the experience of women who engage, by choice or by compulsion, with the legal system . Twenty-nine women, among them community activists, academics, practitioners, law students, women litigants, and law society benchers and staff ordered their perspectives on the context in which egalitarian change is occurring and impeded, and on the very mixed results of women's efforts to secure such change from inside and outside the legal system. Twenty-four of those conference participants are represented in this collection. Some 150 people, primarily women from an equally diverse range of constituencies, attended the conference. This book attempts to capture the range of voices and perspectives on women's engagements with law, in pursuit of equality, of those who gathered one day in Ottawa in March 2004. Running through the collection is an understanding of legal practice as more than a job; it is also a crucial location and a vehicle of the struggle for social justice. Equality proponents and activists within the profession approach practice as a calling, and embrace an understanding of lawyering as a public service, an enabling profession. Feminist activists working outside of the profession call upon women lawyers for feminist practices, accountability and power-sharing to empower individual women and frontline women's groups in our common project of securing substantive equality for all women. Hence this book's title, Calling for Change: Women, Law and the Legal Profession.Some of this book's chapters offer the immediacy of the author's original delivery; other chapters are conventional scholarly works that were presented in highly abbreviated form at the conference. Some have the familiar streamlined character of an executive summary or legal memo; others risk painful and critical reflections on the experience of the conference as an instance of growing inequalities among women in relation to law and in society. We have made no attempt to render the texts uniform, preferring to allow the diversity of these texts to underline the diversity of women engaging law and the range of their experiences when doing so.We cannot claim, however, that either the conference or this text is fully representative of the diversity of women engaging the legal system. Ultimately, conference organizers bear responsibility for the voices and issues that were not heard at the event or expressed in this collection. Our efforts to focus the conference beyond the equality struggles and successes of privileged professional women and our active recruiting of non-lawyers, of racialized, Aboriginal, lesbian, disabled, and working-class women revealed that legal activists in and outside the profession and members of under-represented groups within the profession, many of whom are young mothers, remain thin on the ground ten years after Touchstones. They are also overextended precisely because the achievement of diversity in initiatives like this conference increases the already unacceptable emotional, social, familial, and professional burdens on such individuals. We are grateful to those who chose to fit contributing to this conference and this book into their crowded schedules.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,019 | 0,017 |
| Communication savante | 0,016 | 0,014 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,033 | 0,004 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».