“All are welcome here?”: Navigating race, class, gender, sexual orientation, age, and disability in American feminist coffeehouses of the 1970s and 1980s
Classification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the 1970s and 1980s, feminists in the United States began businesses in order to financially support themselves while enacting women's movement politics. Owning and operating a feminist business in a permanent location required large capital investment in order to rent space, buy supplies, and pay workers. Women's, and especially lesbians', social positioning due to discriminatory gender, racial, and sexual orientation laws affected whether or not being able to own a restaurant or store was even possible. Coffeehouses provided an alternative means through which to build feminist communities, with lower initial capital required than restaurants. Feminist coffeehouses in this article will primarily refer to recurring temporary public spaces that served refreshments and provided entertainment. This model of feminist organization expanded participation in some ways; without high fixed costs, coffeehouses enabled women with less money, women from marginalized racial groups, and women with marginalized sexual orientations the ability to create spaces centered on food, drink, and socializing. However, these spaces were not utopic; racism, ageism, trans‐exclusionism, and classism created tension in their respective communities. As coffeehouse organizers tried to address various inequalities, their approach in treating each identity category as discrete often erased women who experienced multiple forms of oppressions simultaneously.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it