Bibliographic record
Abstract
The contemporary women's movement has transformed North American society. Change has been greatest in the realm of everyday life, but feminism has also challenged the substance and practice of politics. Feminists and Party Politics examines the effort to bring feminism into the formal political arena through established political parties in Canada and the United States. Two major sets of questions lie at the heart of this inquiry. First, how have movement organizations approached partisan and electoral politics? To what extent have they tried to change parties? What factors have shaped their approaches? Second, how have parties themselves responded to the mobilization of feminism? Have they taken steps to include women in elite cadres? Have they either adopted any of the policy stances advocated by feminist organizations or instead come to define themselves in opposition to feminism? Lisa Young explores these questions through meticulous research based on numerous interviews with feminist and partisan activists, archival and documentary material, and analysis of attitudinal surveys of political elites. She concludes that although the effort of North American feminists to transform political parties over the past thirty years cannot be judged entirely a success, it has not been a failure. By bringing women into the political arena on something beginning to approach an equal footing, feminists have begun to realize liberal democracy's promise of equal citizenship for women.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".