Contending With Feminism: Women's Health Issues in Margaret Atwood's Early Fiction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Margaret Atwood's early fiction provides a valuable insight into issues surrounding the establishment of the women's health movement. From The Edible Woman in 1969 to The Handmaid's Tale in 1985, Atwood's work takes up key issues of the movement during this time. Her fiction explores a number of women's health topics including contraception, abortion, birthing, assisted reproductive technologies, eating disorders and breast cancer. Atwood's interest in the appearance of victims in Canadian literature, however, leads to a rejection of the notion that women are fated victims of patriarchal institutions like medicine. This thesis argues that while she does not deny women can be victims, she refuses to accept that this role is inevitable. Foucault's later constructions of power and resistance are explored with the female protagonists refusing to believe their situations are inescapable. Atwood's recognition of her role as a popular fiction writer and her refusal to wear the 'feminist' label allow her the space to critique the women's health movement. Her early fiction exposes the absolutism of the movement and demonstrates its limitations in accounting for women's diversity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".