MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283169865 · doi:10.1111/1468-0424.12624

‘Do I need to sit beside the man to be equal to Him’? Second‐Wave Feminism and Jewish Women in Montreal, 1962–1980

2022· article· en· W4283169865 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrea Eidinger

Bibliographic record

VenueGender & History · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminismJudaismGender studiesPrideSociologyWomen's historyHistoryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article is a preliminary study into the impact of feminism within the Jewish‐Canadian community in Montreal in the 1960s and 1970s, based on a combination of archival research and oral history. This research reveals that while community, religious elites and ordinary Jewish women in Montreal did engage with feminist ideas right from the beginning, this engagement was limited in the 1960s and 1970s. Specifically, questions arose about the compatibility of feminism with Jewish religion and culture, particularly with respect to the devaluation of motherhood and family within the larger movement. As a result, Jewish women in Montreal selectively incorporated second‐wave feminism into their lives in contradictory and inconsistent ways, viewing the role of women in the home and family as a source of pride and strength. This suggests the need to rethink our image of feminism in this period by including new understandings of feminist activism and the possibility that the lack of connection over the subject of motherhood was the norm rather than the exception.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGender & HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207