MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115703749 · doi:10.1353/crv.2006.0027

"More Than She Deserves": Woman Suffrage Memorials in the "Equality State"

2006· article· en· W2115703749 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victoria Lamont

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Natural History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuffrageVictoryState (computer science)PoliticsHistorySeekersLawMovement (music)Political scienceGender studiesArtSociologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How is it that the first significant victory in the history of the woman suffrage movement—the enfranchisement of women in Wyoming Territory in 1869—is also the most poorly remembered and understood? This article argues that the terms by which woman suffrage was deemed memorable in Wyoming were at odds with the historical material itself: Political women were frowned upon in Wyoming; hence memorials were erected to women who had played a relatively minor role in the movement, while the most active suffragists were demonized as mannish office seekers. Buildings most closely associated with woman suffrage, such as the site where the first woman jurors deliberated, were allowed to go to ruin while monuments to early suffrage "mothers" were erected on sites of dubious provenance. This fragile foundation rendered these memorials vulnerable to critique by twentieth-century historians who characterized suffrage as a gift given to women by a chivalrous legislature. Meanwhile, the woman activists who had sacrificed their reputations for the sake of the cause have been all but forgotten. Comment se fait-il que la première victoire significative dans l'histoire du mouvement pour le suffrage féminin – l'octroi du droit de vote aux femmes dans le Territoire du Wyoming en 1869 – soit également le moins connu et le moins bien compris ? La thèse de cet article est que les conditions qui rendaient mémorable le suffrage des femmes dans le Wyoming cadraient mal avec la matière historique elle-même : les femmes politiques étaient mal vues dans le Wyoming, c'est pourquoi on a érigé des monuments à celles qui avaient joué un rôle relativement mineur au sein du mouvement, alors que les suffragistes les plus engagées étaient perçues comme des femmes masculines en quête de pouvoir. Les lieux les plus étroitement associés au suffrage féminin, par exemple l'endroit où les premières femmes juristes ont délibéré, ont été laissésà l'abandon tandis que des monuments à certaines « mères » du mouvement ont été érigés sur des sites douteux. En raison de leurs fondements fragiles, ces monuments ont ainsi été exposésà la critique des historiens du vingtième siècle, qui ont caractérisé le droit de vote comme un cadeau qu'une législature galante aurait fait aux femmes. Pendant ce temps, les activistes qui avaient sacrifié leur réputation pour la cause ont été presque oubliées.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0210.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicArchaeology and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207