Cold War Comforts: Canadian Women, Child Safety, and Global Insecurity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
COLD WAR COMFORTS: CANADIAN WOMEN, CHILD SAFETY, AND GLOBAL INSECURITY Tarah Brookfield Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2012 Cold War Comforts is an engaging study of Canadian women's domestic and international activism in the early Cold War period. Brookfield successfully argues that between the end of the Second World War and the Vietnam War, Canadian women utilized the twin concepts of maternalism (as either literal or symbolic mothers) and internationalism to engage with the policy-making process surrounding children's safety and welfare. In the early post-Second World War years, Cold War tensions created an urgent sense that women needed to prepare for a potential nuclear war, through civil defence and potentially investing in a home fallout shelter. Cold War Comforts examines how, as the nature of the conflict altered and the realities of a potential nuclear conflict became clearer, women's activism shifted from wanting to protect their families from the effects of nuclear war, to demanding, through disarmament and peace activism, that war never happen. In her study, Brookfield divides the subject into two parts: domestic and international, and examines Canadian women's involvement in the United Nations, through such organizations as the United Nations Association and UNICEF, foster parenting plans, activism during the Vietnam War, and international adoption. Brookfield convincingly maintains that their responsibilities and roles as mothers and Canadian citizens spurred these women on and made it possible for them to engage with child safety. Although this study is thoroughly researched and well-executed, there are two relatively minor issues with which Brookfield might have engaged in more depth. In chapter two she uses some American-made civil defence materials, such as Duck and Cover featuring Bert the Turtle, to demonstrate Canadians' engagement with civil defence planning. However, there is little discussion of how American-made materials were used in Canada, nor does she distinguish in a meaningful way between Canadian and American materials. While this may seem a minor issue, her main argument circles around how Canadian women were acting from a keen awareness of their status as Canadian citizens and mothers. Did Canadian women view themselves differently from American? Were civil defence measures in Canada different in any real way from those in the United States? If not, how might that change her overall approach? She does engage with this concept of a unique Canadian identity elsewhere in the book. When discussing Canadian women's reactions to the war in Vietnam she stresses that protest came from frustration that the Canadian government was acting against its international reputation as a peacekeeper. …
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".