MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W335669959

Unmaking War, Remaking Men

2011· article· en· W335669959 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary History and Strategy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawAdversarySociologyShamePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNMAKING WAR, REMAKING MEN, Kathleen Barry, Phoenix Rising Press, Santa Rosa, CA, 2011, 235 pages, $17.95. One key to a successful book is an interesting title. Though Kathleen Barry has succeeded with title Unmaking War, Remaking Men, she has not managed to write a compelling book. topics are wideranging: expendability of men; how military training brainwashes soldiers; national leaders; Israel's illegal war on Lebanon; unmaking of war; and remaking of man. Barry, a sociologist, seems to live in a world where people are products of social constructs. To put it simply, men are aggressive and women are nurturing because society has conditioned them to be that way, not because they might naturally be that way. Because society determines such tendencies, they can be unmade. In end, she wishes for a world reshaped by empathy. While some of her claims would seem obvious to a person with military experience, other observations are surprising. She maintains that military trains soldiers to kill without remorse and develops teams where great shame falls upon those who fail their fellow soldiers. Frankly, any responsible citizen who pays taxes to provide for general defense would neither desire nor expect any other outcome. Oddly, Barry sees military brotherhood, seemingly a virtue, as dangerous and almost perverse, for it creates an elitism where everyone who is not one of them is their enemy. Dehumanizing words such as raghead and haj make killing enemy easier. Using such derogatory terms is a fairly obvious defense mechanism; consider similarly demeaning descriptions for Germans and Japanese in World War II. Barry breaks no new ground here; one need look no further than Thomas Hardy's 1902 poem The Man He Killed to realize that soldiers recognize-but at times must ignore-the enemy's humanity. Barry seems to live in an alternate reality, where valor is a vice and cowardice a virtue. She explores a Tim O'Brien fi ctional story about a young man who lacks courage to swim 20 yards from Minnesota into Canada, an act that would have allowed him to avoid draft during Vietnam era. Because of his cowardice, his failure to fl ee country, he reports for duty. In Barry's world, true heroes run to Canada while cowards serve in armed forces. Perhaps her most outrageous claim is the military functions outside law, human ethics, and just plain decency. If that is not outrageous enough, try this: military sees as heroes those who attack people who are weaker or unable to defend themselves. Much of this book seems to advance a political agenda. She dedicates a full chapter to psychopathic leaders and names Osama bin- Laden, Ariel Sharon, and George as such. Her treatment of President operates at simplistic Bush lied. Kids died level. In a public reading of this book, Barry sealed deal by mentioning Hitler and in same breath; when Barry makes Hitler comparison, she can no longer be taken seriously. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.679
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it