Théories en action : appropriations des théories féministes en milieu libertaire à Berlin et Montréal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation, which lies at the crossroads between sociology of activism, social history of political ideas and gender studies, examines the appropriations of feminist theories within anti-authoritarian communities in Berlin and Montreal, in a comparative perspective. It is based on two ethnographic field researches that combine observations, biographical interviews and archives. First, this work highlights the intellectual dimension of anti-authoritarian activism by showing that academic sphere and anti-authoritarian communities overlap. It also shows that the more isolated from the political life of their country anti-authoritarian activists are, the more they develop a prefigurative action repertoire, which aims at creating autonomous spaces. Furthermore, looking at how anti-authoritarian feminists articulate theory and practice, this thesis brings out three (heteronormalized, lesbian, or sexual-intersectional) appropriations of queer theory. It argues that appropriations of feminist theories are shaped by collective identity processes which define anti-authoritarian sub-communities as much as they participate in these processes. Finally, this work analyzes feminist mobilizations against sexual violence within anti-authoritarian communities. It focuses on the way materialist, queer and/or intersectional feminist theories are used by activists. In this context, it demonstrates that theories cannot be considered as isolated from practices: they are mostly interwoven with organization repertoires (women-only or gender-mixed groups) and action repertoires (offensive or pedagogical actions).
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".