Addressing domestic violence in Canada and the United States: The uneasy co-habitation of women and the state
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feminist sociologists and activists have drawn attention to how violence against women is linked to structural and cultural factors that subordinate women, mainly intersecting inequalities and limited rights. Mobilization by the Battered Women’s and Anti-Violence Movements, media attention, legislation, and policy have increased awareness and support to address violence against women. However, activists and researchers have also critiqued the problems with invoking the power of the state. The authors interrogate the role of the state in addressing domestic violence, especially in the context of immigration in the neoliberal era. More specifically, they examine how domestic violence, as legal and policy discourse, has been framed in Canada and the US, and the resulting forms of intervention. Through a critical literature review the authors show how this framing impacts immigrant and racialized women facing domestic violence. The article highlights problems and gaps in the respective discourses, as well as indicates possibilities for 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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 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 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".