A Living History (1973-1993): How the Experiences of Early Activists Shaped the Violence Against Women (VAW) Movement in Ontario: A Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation shines a light on a group of women who helped to create a violence against women (VAW) movement that changed the course of history in Ontario, Canada for countless women, their families and their communities. This study centres the voices of activists, positioning them as knowledge producers with expertise and wisdom gleaned during five decades of work in the VAW movement in Ontario. A feminist analysis of the VAW movement begins from the standpoint of women. In particular, an intersectional feminist analysis begins from the standpoint of diverse women who embrace the tenets of critical feminist standpoint theory. This study draws on social movement theory (SMT) literature, particularly the scholarship of feminist SMT researchers, to examine the state of the VAW movement in Ontario, Canada. This dissertation is a story about a social movement, specifically the VAW movement in Ontario—a strand of the women’s liberation movement frequently referred to as the second wave, but also on the cusp of ushering in third wave feminism. I document the time period from 1973 to 1993—a period that spans the start of the era when all of the participants in this study began their activist work—until the time of their interviews, which took place between 2014 to 2018. In this dissertation, I challenge the notion that the VAW movement has been reduced to a VAW sector, merely creating and delivering services to select populations of women. This interpretation suggests that there is a loss or erosion of an expressed political commitment to uncovering and eliminating the root causes of VAW. Using a case study methodology, I argue that the VAW activists in this study have been persistently engaged in and committed to ending VAW, although their activism shifts and manifests in several forms throughout the life cycle of the movement. The findings of this dissertation research are intended to bring practical and useful implications that can enhance future strategies for change in the VAW movement, contribute to the knowledge base of social work, and infuse the VAW movement with renewed energy and critical vision.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".