Gender Mainstreaming in Canadian Human Security Policy: The Limitations of Bureaucratic and Security Discourses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to assess how feminist literature on bureaucratic discourse and human security can contribute to a greater understanding of the challenges of gender mainstreaming within policy on human security and conflict management. My particular focus on gender is linked to the reality that gender power relations are consistently present within all societies internationally, most often resulting in the subordination of femininity and by consequence, women. Feminist critiques of the bureaucracy make a strong argument for why there is such difficulty in establishing a gendered security policy, by addressing the gender biased nature of bureaucratic structure, knowledge, and discourse. Through the analysis I hope to shed light on the barriers and access points available within the Canadian bureaucracy in terms of gender mainstreaming in human security policy. Past studies have focused on what gendered aspect of conflict and security policy have ignored, but not why they have ignored these aspects. This paper will attempt to further uncover the why, and what feminist theory can contribute towards understanding the difficulty of gender mainstreaming in Canadian human security policy.
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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
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".