Introduction Canadian Women in the Twentieth Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
She lives in you and me, and in many other women who are not here, for they're washing up the dishes and putting the children to bed.But she lives; they are continuing presences. Virginia Woolf, A Room of One's OwnThis volume analyses Canadian women's experiences during the twentieth century as rooted in the archival record.While stimulated by reflections on women's role during "Canada's century," the book is not intended as another millennial celebration of progress from Victorian constraints to women's liberation.In the following text and images, there is tragedy as well as triumph, frustration as well as joy, shadow as well as light, abuse and discrimination as well as barriers toppled and voices found. 1 We believe that women's stories and women's history, which build on those narratives, are important and should be offered to a wide readership.In the last three decades, women's history has emerged as part of the larger social history project that seeks to recover the lives of "ordinary" people.Early efforts that had focused on the "woman worthies" later expanded to encompass women's paid and unpaid work, women's social and political organizations and institutions, and, most particularly, women's demand for the vote.Dominant themes included issues of class, ethnicity, immigration, and, to a lesser extent, culture and religion.More recently, women's history has turned its critical eye to probe new areas of specialization, exploring aspects of race and sexuality and the complexity of women's multiple identities. 2 This collection, in part, reflects this evolution and includes many of the themes and interpretive frameworks in the study of women's history.We do not claim the book to be completely representative of the total experience of twentieth-century Canadian women.The process of soliciting manuscripts has meant that some topics are well represented and others underrepresented or omitted altogether.The sample found here is also constrained by the limitations of formal archival collections.Most public archives in Canada, by their nature and mandates, reflect the figures and historical events of the dominant culture.As part of that culture, they have not acquired the same volume of representational material for non-dominant groups.Even where there exist archival records that document women's experiences, accessing them can be difficult.3 The language used in catalogues, and other finding aids is based on concepts that mask women's particular contributions.Accessibility to these records has improved, however, as archivists have become more aware of inclusive terminology and of the gender implications for archival policies relating to acquisition and description.4
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.003 |
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".