MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165973618 · doi:10.3138/topia.20.109

Moving Past Ressentiment: War and the State of Feminist Freedom

2008· article· en· W2165973618 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dina Georgis

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminismSociologyAnachronismVampirePower (physics)PoliticsPsychoanalysisGender studiesConversationEmpowermentAestheticsLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyLiteraturePsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper works with Nietzsche’s concept of ressentiment because it offers important insights into the implications of anachronistic feminist epistemologies of freedom that are built on, as Wendy Brown argues, attachments to wounded identities. Injured by power, second and third-wave feminism’s response to loss is to assert the right to power and empowerment. As this strategy forecloses loss and human vulnerability, it renders feminism unable to respond adequately to war and contemporary political conflict. Drawing on postcolonial questions of loss and suffering in conversation with ressentiment, I suggest that feminism can begin to unlearn what Stuart Hall has called “our habits of mind.” To elucidate what a new feminism that is “touched by loss” might look like, I turn to Joss Whedon’s Buffy the Vampire Slayer and post-9/11 responses to advance the politics of grief and mourning.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.065
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.006
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicPhilosophy, Ethics, and ExistentialismFrench-language works237,207