'No woman no cry': An examination of the use of feminist ideology in shelters for abused women when working with Caribbean-Canadian women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While abused women shelters using feminist interventions make up the majority of services being provided to all abused women, very little research has focused on the efficacy of using feminist ideology with abused minority women. As an initial step in evaluating the aforementioned area, this study identified the major needs and concerns of abused Caribbean-Canadian women staying in feminist abused women shelters. It also identified the benefits and barriers of using a feminist ideology with these women, as expressed by support staff who have worked with Caribbean-Canadian women. Information was gathered in interviews with 6 female staff who work in shelters in Southern Ontario, Canada. A thematic analysis indicated that the research participants felt that there are many barriers with regards to using a feminist ideology with Caribbean-Canadian women. Some include: a lack of support for religion, lack of cultural understanding, and apprehension with feminism. In addition, the participants noted the frequent experiences of racism and discrimination that Caribbean women experience from the shelter organization, the residents and in Canadian society. Also, the participants noted various directions for enhanced services for abused Caribbean-Canadian women. The implications of the study are discussed in relation to the need for services that more accurately integrate the unique ideas, perspectives and needs of Caribbean-Canadian women, as well as services, that work from a truly anti-oppressive framework.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".