The peculiarities of ideology of the first-wave feminist movement in Alberta: maternal feminism, Anglo-Canadian nationalism, and eugenics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines certain ideological peculiarities of the first-wave feminist movement in the Canadian province of Alberta, and intertwinement of Anglo-Canadian nationalism, maternal feminism and eugenics in the ideological basis of the feminist movement in the early XX century. The author examines the fusion of the questions of gender and nationality in ideology of the feminist movement, and analyzes the formation and realization of a particular feminist agenda in Alberta, which was based on the specific ideology of maternal feminism. Paying special attention to similarity of the ideology and objectives of the Anglo-Canadian nationalistic and feminist movements in the province, the author notes the causes for rapid success of the feminist movement by pivotal goals of the agenda. The scientific novelty of this research is substantiated by the fact that the author is first within the Russian historiography to explore the intertwinement of nationality and gender in ideology of the feminist movement in Alberta. The conclusion is drawn on the interinfluence of Anglo-Canadian nationalism, maternal feminism and eugenics in the ideological basis of the first-wave feminist movement in Alberta, as well as placing in the agenda the question of equal rights of men and women as an important aspect in preservation of Anglo-Canadian ideals for the future generations in Alberta.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".