StephanieGilmore. Groundswell: Grassroots Feminist Activism in Postwar America. New York: Routledge, 2013.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Like most social movements, modern American feminism's features can best be seen at the local level.Stephanie Gilmore's Groundswell provides grassroots accounts of the National Organization for Women chapters in Memphis, Columbus, and San Francisco.One of her purposes is to demonstrate that the labels of "women's rights" and "radical" feminism are inaccurate.NOW, historically portrayed as the best manifestation of liberal feminism, was, in actuality, an embodiment of both streams at the local level.The author also seeks to show how local NOW chapters combined a national agenda with one that was locally driven by issues that were decided and acted upon by community activists.As Gilmore emphasizes, it is no small feat to challenge the false dichotomy of the liberal/radical paradigm for understanding and explaining the women's movements of the 1960s and 1970s.Using oral interviews, archival and personal papers from NOW and its local activists, Gilmore clarifies how local NOW chapters and activists worked on issues that were important to both sides that have been artificially divided in much of the scholarly literature and narratives of the history of the women's movements.Each case study is presented mostly chronologically from the late 1960s to the late 1970s with attention to what local issues each chapter addressed, conflict inside and outside the organization, and its contributions to NOW's national priorities, especially the ERA campaign.In Memphis, Gilmore discusses how views of the "Southern belle" bred racial tensions and turned African-American women away from NOW altogether.In Columbus, by contrast, the local issues were driven more by employment discrimination than by racial tension.In San Francisco, NOW built alliances with other social movements and worked on a broader array of issues to be relevant in a city with a long-established social movement foundation.To properly convey
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.015 |
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".