MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W430775092

Canadian Women & the Struggle for Equality by Lorna Marsden

2014· article· en· W430775092 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Okori Uneke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational social science review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)CitizenshipConstitutionImmigrationSociologyGender studiesLawSuffragePoliticsPolitical scienceHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marsden, Lorna R. Canadian Women & Struggle for Equality. Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press, 2012. xi + 290 pages. Hardcover, $29.99. Canadian Women & Struggle for Equality is a historical-sociological account of transformational process women went through in their quest for equality in Canada. Lorna R. Marsden, a sociologist, activist, former Canadian senator, and former university president, recounts long road toward equality women have traveled. She discusses this struggle in context of evolution of law, demographics, labor force, health care, immigration, and world wars. In effect, this book aims at a comprehensive explanation of how women and women's organizations contributed to social change and how sociological circumstances within which major improvements in status of women in Canada came to pass. The focus is on means through which Canadian women and their male supporters succeeded in moving their agendas into law or common practice. What is remarkable was that social change in Canada was slow and accretive, and struggle for women's equality occurred without social strife or acrimonious debate. The author traces gender inequality in Canada to British North America (BNA) of 1867, which became basis of Canadian constitution. The first major flaw of BNA was the complete omission of rights or recognition of women. Women neither participated directly in nor were mentioned as a group in debates that led to BNA Act (p. 30). As a result, women were ignored in public life. Voting rights excluded women, and women's citizenship was tied until 1946 to their husbands or fathers. If a woman married a non-British subject, she automatically lost, along with other citizenship rights, right of franchise. Married women were (or were expected to be) dependent on their husbands' income and could not seek paid employment outside home. Single or widowed women were expected to live on modest means. Women were not likely to consider themselves equal to men and, even if contemplated, opportunities in public domain to express such beliefs were limited. While women could vote in public elections in 1960s, there were very few female representatives in legislatures or courts. Furthermore, only married women had access to birth control. In fact, general perception was that women achieved a higher moral status through motherhood. Consequently, women were not only relegated to maternal role, but were also denied any significant role in other aspects of society. Even marriage did not confer equality on women, as evidenced in Irene Murdoch Case in Alberta in 1973, in which Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Mrs. Murdoch, despite building and maintaining family ranch together with her husband, was not entitled to an interest in lands. Some historical events, notably involvement of women in First and Second World Wars, helped create economic opportunities and improve women's rights. Women's suffrage, for example, came as a consequence of war. While some provinces had granted women voting rights in municipal elections as property owners, Canadian Parliament debated whether provincial suffrage automatically gave women vote in federal elections. The law granting women federal vote came into force January 1, 1919. …

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational social science reviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207