MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4394784342 · doi:10.1353/wsq.2024.a924331

Taking Feminism beyond the Academy

2024· article· en· W4394784342 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Hotter

Notice bibliographique

RevueWomen's studies quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGender Diversity and Inequality
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFeminismSociologyGender studies

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Taking Feminism beyond the Academy Anna Hotter (bio) Carrie N. Baker and Aviva Dove-Viebahn (eds.)'s Public Feminisms: From Academy to Community, Ann Arbor, MI: Lever Press, 2023 Philosophy books—even feminist ones—do not usually include calls to action. Perhaps they know their audience (sedentary introverts). Or perhaps they fail to see what Public Feminisms: From Academy to Community takes as its guiding principle: that academics should "reach out beyond their classrooms, labs, and libraries to engage a broader public in collaborative and mutually beneficial relationships that can lead to new knowledge and much-needed solutions to the most pressing problems of our day" (Baker and Dove-Viebahn, "Conclusion," 455). This rallying cry caps the collection's twenty-two essays about feminist praxis by scholars in anthropology, film and media studies, law, English, women and gender studies, and classics. They have all moved "beyond the confines of the ivory tower" to engage civilian communities in academic activism (Guy-Sheftall, "Foreword," xv). I agree with Public Feminisms's editors, Carrie N. Baker and Aviva Dove-Viebahn (professors of American studies and film and media studies, respectively), that scholars have something to learn from the contributors' examples. My philosopher colleagues and I could certainly use a break from the armchair. But Public Feminisms is no tedious how-to guide. It is a collection of vibrant stories by professors and students who have managed to puncture the spatial, epistemic, technological, and economic divide between academia and public life. Part 1 features essays about using "art, media, and public programming" to engage a variety of communities in feminist scholarship. A women's and gender studies professor at Mount Royal University leads walking tours on "Calgary's adult consensual sex industry" for up to twelve visitors (Williams, "From Classroom to Pavement," 57). Two professors at California State campuses host Las Doctoras, a podcast about Latinx [End Page 339] feminism and motherhood that "make[s] accessible the feminism that we teach as profesoras in the university" (Rose and Lemus, "Las Doctoras," 39). An anthropologist creates a live-action role-play event that lets participants engage with the stories of Indigenous women who have experienced intimate partner violence (Eddy, "Day Angela Died," 83–84). Public Feminisms upends the dichotomy between serious scholarship and playfulness—feminist work can be creative and dynamic, while tackling difficult topics. Part 2, "Activism and Public Education," opens with a story about a Take Back the Night march that connects the University of Toledo to its local activist community. Another essay features three undergraduates who analyze the trans-inclusivity of their HWCs (historically women's colleges) using "duoethnographic methods" (Rodriguez Gonzalez et al., "Building Bridges," 177). I initially misread Public Feminisms's title—I skipped over the second s in favor of a sleeker Feminism. But the singular would shortchange the eclectic cross-section of disciplines, modes of engagement, localities, cultural contexts, and epistemic standpoints Baker and Dove-Viebahn showcase. "Feminists generally share a belief in equality and justice for women," the editors note, but "they define the term in multiple ways, with different emphases and priorities" (Baker and Dove-Viebahn, "Introduction," 12). Public Feminisms's plural, intersectional scope is not just a methodological virtue. It also makes the collection fun to read. Part 3 focuses on "public writing and scholarship" and presents Dove-Viebahn's own experience with interviewing women in film for Ms. magazine—"an online platform lends itself to an immediacy not possible with print books" (Dove-Viebahn, "A 'Feminist Lens' on Activism and Inclusion in the Film and Television Industry," 251). It also features a women's, gender, and sexuality studies professor at Oregon State University who publishes on her Baptist faith—"My university press books reached audiences of hundreds across several years. A single piece in Ms. Magazine … can reach thousands in just a few days" (Shaw, "Feminism, Faith, and Public Scholarship," 271)—and a Turkish translator collective that makes one of the few international contributions to Public Feminisms. The collection's North American bias (which Baker and Dove-Viebahn acknowledge in their introduction) underlines the Turkish writers' central point: amplifying underrepresented voices—through translation and other radical actions—must be an explicit aim of public...

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 candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,301
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

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 technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
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 Opus0,125
Tête enseignante GPT0,364
Écart entre enseignants0,238 · 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.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
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
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueWomen's studies quarterlyMême sujetGender Diversity and InequalityTravaux en français237 207