Sur l’indivisibilité de la justice sociale ou Pourquoi le mouvement féministe québécois ne peut faire l’économie d’une analyse intersectionnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En partant du concept d’indivisibilité de la justice, cet article se penche sur la pertinence des théories de l’intersectionnalité des oppressions dans le contexte du féminisme québécois francophone pour démontrer 1) l’existence d’une protothéorie de l’intersectionnalité dans le féminisme radical des années 1970 au Québec et 2) que les féministes québécoises d’aujourd’hui sont bien placées pour proposer une synthèse entre l’approche intersectionnelle en provenance des États-Unis et le matérialisme français. Cette démonstration permettra au passage de récuser deux accusations fallacieuses au sujet de l’approche intersectionnelle, soit qu’elle est postmoderne et source de fragmentation du mouvement féministe.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".