MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971371455 · doi:10.1163/157181002761931369

The Horizon of Becoming: Culture, Gender and History after September 11

2002· article· en· W1971371455 on OpenAlex
Wright

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNordic Journal of International Law · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational lawPublic international lawSociologyLawLegal historyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Feminist analyses of international law can be seen as part of the wider effort to broaden international law beyond its current foundations and assumptions. International lawyers can usefully work with feminist, post-colonial, indigenous, critical and postmodern perspectives in contextualizing the universalist claims of international law in order to make it both more inclusive and more sophisticated. International law might be positively transformed if it were to take the critical approaches of feminist and other scholars seriously. This article is an attempt to problematize the concepts of time and history as they relate to an understanding of international law from the perspective of the feminist, the post-colonial and the indigenous. How we analyze international law in an historical context strongly determines how relevant international law is to women and other marginalized voices. Attempting to understand the history of international law is essential to understanding how it works (or does not work) and how it is changing. But our understandings of history are themselves deeply flawed as analytical tools. The voices of the silenced are usually described as not being heard because of imbalances in economic and political power. On a deeper level they also may not be heard because the very nature of historical and legal discourse in the international arena makes their voices unintelligible within the `malestream' of time and history. We expect history to give us a sense of the truth of our shared past. But because historical records are dominated by the representation of the most powerful, the `truth' of those who are excluded from power may not seem genuine. More commonly, it is ignored. What we think of as a reality that we have shared may not in fact have been shared in the same way by `others' – even when `we' ourselves are part of that `other'. International law as we now know it was created as an offshoot of the development of the modern nation-state based on secular ideals of rationality and order. Women's history often tries to recapture the detail of all those `people without history' who have worked, fought, mothered and struggled `behind the scenes' of the Great Events depicted in wars and political battles that are so central to our usual shared vision. International law prioritizes precisely this dominant vision – the use of force, sovereignty, the state, the political, the military, the economic and the diplomatic. What does September 11 mean for women, for the poor, for indigenous peoples? This article does not discount the importance of recent world events – only that we might see them through different eyes from which we might gain new insights.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.177 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it