NATIONALISM, SUFFRAGE & MATERNAL FEMINISM: RACE, GENDER & RELIGION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract:The turn of the nineteenth century was an extremely dynamic and formative time in Canadian history as it defined its “imagined community.” Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities espoused nation and nationalism through his concept as “imagined communities,” both politically and culturally. “National identities are imagined as both intrinsically limited and sovereign. The nation is imagined as limited because, no matter the size or scope, it is finite in its inclusion and there is always “others” beyond its borders.” Through research on suffragist writings from both men and women, suffragist organizations membership, documents written about the future of Canada, and the concept of maternal feminism there remained a majority of people committed to a future “White Anglo-Saxon Protestant” nation. The women’s suffragist movement and “maternal feminism,” intertwined with nationalism, created a reciprocal effect, which established an “imagined community” that included those who belonged and “others” who clearly did not. Suffragist, armed with new found political influence, endorsed policies of assimilation or legislation to keep Canada from accepting people of “degenerating” races or religions. Clearly, nationalism and an emerging Canadian identity had profound influences on the suffragist movement and maternal feminism, causing once a once marginalized gender to now subjugate “others” based on class, race or religion.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".