Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expansion of women’s political space is a means toward empowering women typically identified in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers of less developed countries. Calls for the cultivation of women leaders in turn correspond with attempts to facilitate this expansion. Focusing on Bangladesh in particular, this article deconstructs normative notions of leadership in the context of current gender and development discourse in order to help understand the value of leadership as a women’s empowerment variable. Though leadership is a necessary adjunct to collective action, itself oft-considered crucial to social change, insight offered by third wave feminist theorists as to the fallacy of the ‘oneness of women’ raises questions as to the exact process by which a woman leader is to develop between herself and other impoverished Bangladeshi women a sense of power with—that is, to ‘collectively self-objectify’ (Drury et al. 2005). Here I offer an analysis of Bangladeshi nongovernmental organisation Nagorik Uddyog’s Grassroots Women’s Leadership Network, a programme whose methodology appears to align markedly well with Spivak’s (1987) notion of ‘strategic essentialism’, and which may serve as a useful model for how to reconcile post-modern feminism with the need for power with as a mechanism for social change.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".