Staying with the Social Project: A Review of Feminist Criminology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Review of the Field In this issue, Social & Legal Studies is pleased to publish the third of an occasional feature: Review of the Field. Our ambition in this series is to publish articles which reflect upon fields of study and which offer a critical appraisal of the key literature and concepts. The aim is to provide not only a valuable map of the scholarly terrain but, equally, we hope that the format will give authors the opportunity to set a direction of travel for their discipline. Thus, we anticipate that reviews will ask new research questions, identify gaps in the scholarship and explore connections and discontinuities between diverse bodies of knowledge. Suggestions for future reviews are welcome and should be addressed to members of the Editorial Board. We are pleased to publish this Review of Feminist Criminology by Katharine Dunbar Winsor of Concordia University. We hope that our readers agree with us that the article provides an important addition to the literature and provides an invaluable template for contributors of future reviews. Editorial Board Social & Legal Studies The emergence of the feminist movement in the 1960s and 1970s became a primary influence of the field of feminist criminology. Feminist criminology has evolved over the past several decades and has remained impacted by and in dialogue with feminist thought and perspectives. Within the field, researchers have focused on producing and circulating women-centred knowledge. Despite this, tensions within the field highlight diverging approaches to what and who is studied. In Canada, the maturation of feminist criminology as a field has coincided with significant changes to women’s penology. In this essay, the development and changes to feminist criminology are mapped through an examination of key events and changes in Canada’s penal strategies for women. What emerges is the argument that feminist criminology must understand itself beyond narrow and discrete terms and instead must work with the tensions and debates of the field to keep women’s voices centred and the feminist social project alive.
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 | 0.016 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".