Rewriting Girlhood: Gendered Subjectivities Among Girls and Young Women Attending a Girls’ Empowerment Program in a Rural Canadian Community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last three decades have seen a substantial shift in the way Western culture views girls. While previously girls were seen as unimportant and passed over for inquiries into boyhood and womanhood, girls and girlhood have become of central concern in academic and popular culture. This shift from the periphery gave rise to multiple, contradictory girlhood discourses that framed our understanding of girlhood in different ways: girls as vulnerable and in crisis, girls as empowered “can-do” girls, and girls as mean and relationally aggressive. This dissertation is nested within a feminist, interdisciplinary, multi-phase, mixed method community-engaged research project conducted in collaboration with a girls’ empowerment program. Drawing on interviews and focus groups with girls and young women who attended the empowerment camp between 2013 and 2015, this dissertation employs a feminist poststructuralist framework to examine gendered subjectivities of girls and young women living in a rural southwestern Ontario community. The analysis examines how girls and young women construct their understandings of girlhood and how discourses of rurality, girlhood, and femininity, and the subject positions produced through discourse, are implicated in the production of gendered rural subjectivities. Embedded within this analysis is an examination of how the girls and young women constructed ‘place’ within their accounts and the extent to which girls’ subjectivities are situated as their accounts of ‘being’ a girl shifted between constructing their identities and experiences of girlhood at school and the empowerment camp. As a feminist and action-oriented project, this dissertation explores the implications of girls’ empowerment programs and engages with possibilities for empowering girls and young women in ways that resist individualized, neoliberal approaches to empowerment.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.044 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".