The Politics of Textualising Recall:Women in Canadian Feminist Histor(iograph)y
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article traite de la politique derriere le souvenir collectif de la race.Il argumente que la rubrique « femme» est souvent implicitement categorisee comme etant blanche dans I'historique feministe canadienne.Ce probleme est mis de l'avant a travers un examen des pratiques qui normalisaient les hierarchies raciales dans le Haut et le Bas Canada.Whereas women in feminist discourse is intended universally, a myopia exists with its application in Canadian feminist histor(iograph)y.A blindness to race has sustained amnesia around crucial moments in the histories of Native and Black women in eighteenth-century Canada.Such poor-sighted scholarship with its distorted long-lasting (im)prints pose an ethical problem for Canadian feminism.This critique examines some feminist texts which treat women in colonial Canada in a universalist yet c/overtly exclusionary manner.My perspective is not new, merely one that underlines the problem of Whiteness plaguing the political and epistemological models of Canadian feminism.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".