A Fight of Gender Equality: Our Suffragist Role Models
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
This paper examines the legacy of Canadian suffragists in the realm of women’s political representation by analyzing some of their successes and failures and the methods in which they used to arrive at those results. Feminist movements and the fight for equality and systemic change are only increasing and becoming more widely participated in as time moves forward, making it of utmost importance to acknowledge our foundational change-makers and to pull lessons from their methods and attempt to apply them to modern-day movement tactics. Using work from various notable authors, such as Carol Bacchi, Erin Steuter and Sue Findlay, this paper follows the suffragists’ path to enfranchisement (the right to vote) and develops bridges between historical and modern feminist calls to action. While it is noted that our time periods are vastly different, many basic elements can be examined, and it is shown that these bridges are crucial to learning how to navigate current and future fights for change with the desired success.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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