Backtalk: Implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 in the Canadian Armed Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation examines the implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). It argues that the gender equality norms contained within UNSCR 1325 have been distorted by the discursive framework used to achieve buy-in within the masculinized culture of the CAF. Fearing backlash prompted by unpopular past gender integration initiatives, a discourse of operational efficacy was used to introduce UNSCR 1325 to the Canadian military. This discourse functionally separated UNSCR 1325 from past and present initiatives designed to challenge the dominance of militarized masculinity in the CAF. The problematic culture of the CAF was further emboldened by a conservative political opportunity structure under the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, under whose governance the first Canadian National Action Plan on UNSCR 1325 (2010-2016) was drafted. The Harper administration advanced a reimagined Canadian nationalism that emphasized NATO engagement in Afghanistan at the expense of Canada’s liberal internationalist past, further pulling Canadian public sentiment and resources away from the United Nations.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".