Grand Dames and Gentle Helpmeets: women and the royal honours system in New Zealand, 1917–2000
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars, for the most part, have paid little attention to royal honours systems, both in Britain and in the settler societies whose honours systems are derived from that of Britain. This article challenges that neglect through a particular focus on women's experiences of the New Zealand royal honours system. It uses the New Zealand context as a window on to the gendered nature of honours systems, arguing that the history of honours is a rich field of research for women's historians interested in shifts in society and in gender identities and statuses in the twentieth century. Focusing on the award of titles to women, the article explores patterns in such awards and the representations of the recipients in popular culture. Like many women who have reached the top of a historically male-dominated system, their experiences display a constant disjunction between conformity to traditional images and ideals of the feminine as being exceptionally situated as different from other women.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it