An Even Stronger Woman: The Substantial Role of Indigenous Women Throughout North American Herstory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous women have had immense impacts on North American society since before the beginning of the colonization process. Recent historical research has shed light on these influences made by Indigenous women as they begin to unpack the multiple abilities of these strong women. Indigenous women controlled both the private and public spheres by captaining the economic, political, and social roles of society. They had a voice within their communities and used it to obtain change and progress. They were respected mothers, providers, nurturers, and leaders. These women worked endlessly as producers of vast fields of agriculture and as important members of the fur trade to sustain their communities. This paper explores the roles that Indigenous women took on throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and how they broke gender roles and stereotypes that were common in their European counterparts’ societies during this period. This is done by incorporating the perspectives of Indigenous women themselves who haven written about the lives their ancestors lived and everything they accomplished. These new perspectives show that Indigenous women were essential and resilient to the success of their communities. They prove that behind all strong men, there are even stronger woman.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".