Could We Be Any More Feminist? Make Me Barf: Responses to Art at a Women's University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We began this research with the observation that one finds hostile environments for women in the unlikeliest places.For we found an instance of extreme misogynist rancour --in art exhibit commentary books, in a library, at Canada's only women's university.This is a campus where 60% of faculty and 85% of students are women.Sixty per cent of students are over the age of twenty-four and therefore categorized as "nontraditional."Moreover, the university emphasizes and honours its difference from traditional universities in its explicit dedication to the education of women, as evidenced in its mandate: the university states that it considers the educational needs of women to be paramount, although men are welcomed.Programs, class times, facilities and services are specifically tailored to provide maximum accessibility for women.All the programs we offer are periodically reviewed to ensure that women's concerns are reflected in courses and curriculum ...[T]he objectives of the university [are] to educate women and provide strong leadership role models ... the university's commitment [is] to provide a positive learning environment where women's contributions and perspectives are valued.(Mount Saint Vincent University Academic Calendar 1999-2000: 15) The University's Art Gallery's mandate affirms its participation in this womencentredness: "[t]he Gallery reflects the University's educational mission by emphasizing the representation of women as cultural subjects and producers" (msvu art gallery, 1999-2000).Given these clearly stated academic and curatorial intentions, as well as the enactments of artists and curators of the Art Gallery's innovative "Window Box" series of installations in the library --the focus of our study --meant to "extend the gallery's activities into the university and in so doing expand its audience, especially among students, and raise critical awareness about contemporary art issues ..." (Collyer, n.d., 1 From Aprons comment book; all subsequent quotations from comment books have been transcribed ad literatim in order to communicate the tone and impact of the comments.("barf" is a North American slang expression meaning "vomit" [The Casselll Dictionary of Slang, 1998])
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.045 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".