JUDITH FINGARD, JANET GUILDFORD, editors. Mothers of the Municipality: Women, Work, and Social Policy in Post-1945 Halifax. Buffalo, N.Y.: University of Toronto Press. 2005. Pp. viii, 318. Cloth $65.00, paper $35.00
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the last decade there has been increasing interest in the postwar period of Canadian social history, a transformative period in state-citizen relations that deeply affected understandings of gender, race, class, and sexuality. Much of this scholarship has focused on the national level. This collection of essays, edited by Judith Fingard and Janet Guildford, shifts the terrain by exploring these dramatic changes in social life at the local level. Halifax is a wonderful site for such local analysis as a port city with international influxes of people and ideas, a place dominated by a military presence, and the capital of a province considered a leader in Atlantic Canada yet one also known for its conservative social values. Out of this city came a surge of women's activism in the postwar period that reconstructed women's roles and provided new services for those in need. It is women's activism of this particular period that is the focus of the collection. This activism was tinged with maternalism, which, in many cases, had both liberating and oppressive effects on various groups of women. The contributors to the collection are aware of the contradictory nature of such maternalist causes, but for the most part the authors choose to focus on the positive and celebrate the contributions that women made during the era. They highlight how women improved the lives of women and children through women's organizations, women's volunteer experiences, and individual campaigns. Contributors address four major themes: the role of the state, the secularization of services, the influence of the Cold War on Halifax, and the complicated relationship between city and province.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".