Nonconformists, Nonresistors, and Citizens: Women Living in the World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malinda Bricker (dates unknown), an Ontario resident, was a convert to the Mennonite Church in 1895.Though initially inclined to join the Methodists, she could not reconcile herself to their practice of infant baptism and the swearing of oaths, religious customs that were rejected by Mennonites.At the time, Mennonites of some subgroups were just beginning to enforce a dress code of 'plain' attire, including a head covering, cape dress, and bonnet, that was part of church membership.That Malinda was reluctant to adopt the dress code is evident in a letter to her mentor, Mennonite evangelist John S. Coffman.She wrote, "I made a cap for myself and I want to go to Berlin [Kitchener] tomorrow if I can to get a bonnet.If I would live to please men or even myself I would never join the Mennonite Church as you well know, but I want to live for Christ and for this reason I join this church. . . ." 1 After her baptism into the church, Malinda's plain dress set her apart from surrounding society and identified her clearly as a Mennonite, as it would for many other women in the decades that followed.Helen Erb (1918-2005), a young Ontario woman, married her boyfriend Clayton Burkholder at Christmas 1943, during his second leave from Alternative Service camp in British Columbia.As a Mennonite conscientious objector (CO) to war, Clayton Burkholder earned fifty cents a day, first working on road C H A P T E R F O U R N o n c o n f o r m i s t s , N o n r e s i s t o r s , a n d C i t i z e n s : Wo m e n L i v i n g i n t h e Wo r l d
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".