Patriarchy Rejected: A Feminist Reading in Some Selected Poems by Adrienne Rich and Fatima Naoot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper offers a comparative feminist reading of the American poet Adrienne Rich and the Egyptian poet Fatima Naoot. It aims at analyzing both Rich’s and Naoot’s poetry in terms of feminist criticism demonstrated particularly in Beauvoir and Millett’s theory of patriarchy. The collections from which the poems under study are selected are Rich’s The Fact of a Doorframe: Poems Selected and New, 1950-1984 (2002), and Naoot’s A Bottle of Glue (2007). The selected poems are Rich’s “Aunt Jennifer’s Tigers”, “An Unsaid Word”, and “Power”, and Naoot’s “The Cock’s Crest”, “A Goose”, and “Isis”. The analysis of these poems motivates one to infer three essential points regarding the poetic achievement of both poets. First, patriarchy is a male programming engineered by the male to subdue and decentralize the female by treating the latter as if she were a sexed being, or rather the inessential other. Second, this inferior position of woman motivates Rich and Naoot to incorporate Beauvoir and Millett’s theory of patriarchy into their verse. In order to achieve this objective, both poets set up a poetic vision in terms of which they portray how patriarch marginalizes and subordinates woman. Lastly, the close reading to the selected pieces denotes that they rotate around the systematized oppression of women. Such is the common theme of Rich and Naoot’s verse.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".