MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394784342 · doi:10.1353/wsq.2024.a924331

Taking Feminism beyond the Academy

2024· article· en· W4394784342 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Hotter

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen's studies quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminismSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking Feminism beyond the Academy Anna Hotter (bio) Carrie N. Baker and Aviva Dove-Viebahn (eds.)'s Public Feminisms: From Academy to Community, Ann Arbor, MI: Lever Press, 2023 Philosophy books—even feminist ones—do not usually include calls to action. Perhaps they know their audience (sedentary introverts). Or perhaps they fail to see what Public Feminisms: From Academy to Community takes as its guiding principle: that academics should "reach out beyond their classrooms, labs, and libraries to engage a broader public in collaborative and mutually beneficial relationships that can lead to new knowledge and much-needed solutions to the most pressing problems of our day" (Baker and Dove-Viebahn, "Conclusion," 455). This rallying cry caps the collection's twenty-two essays about feminist praxis by scholars in anthropology, film and media studies, law, English, women and gender studies, and classics. They have all moved "beyond the confines of the ivory tower" to engage civilian communities in academic activism (Guy-Sheftall, "Foreword," xv). I agree with Public Feminisms's editors, Carrie N. Baker and Aviva Dove-Viebahn (professors of American studies and film and media studies, respectively), that scholars have something to learn from the contributors' examples. My philosopher colleagues and I could certainly use a break from the armchair. But Public Feminisms is no tedious how-to guide. It is a collection of vibrant stories by professors and students who have managed to puncture the spatial, epistemic, technological, and economic divide between academia and public life. Part 1 features essays about using "art, media, and public programming" to engage a variety of communities in feminist scholarship. A women's and gender studies professor at Mount Royal University leads walking tours on "Calgary's adult consensual sex industry" for up to twelve visitors (Williams, "From Classroom to Pavement," 57). Two professors at California State campuses host Las Doctoras, a podcast about Latinx [End Page 339] feminism and motherhood that "make[s] accessible the feminism that we teach as profesoras in the university" (Rose and Lemus, "Las Doctoras," 39). An anthropologist creates a live-action role-play event that lets participants engage with the stories of Indigenous women who have experienced intimate partner violence (Eddy, "Day Angela Died," 83–84). Public Feminisms upends the dichotomy between serious scholarship and playfulness—feminist work can be creative and dynamic, while tackling difficult topics. Part 2, "Activism and Public Education," opens with a story about a Take Back the Night march that connects the University of Toledo to its local activist community. Another essay features three undergraduates who analyze the trans-inclusivity of their HWCs (historically women's colleges) using "duoethnographic methods" (Rodriguez Gonzalez et al., "Building Bridges," 177). I initially misread Public Feminisms's title—I skipped over the second s in favor of a sleeker Feminism. But the singular would shortchange the eclectic cross-section of disciplines, modes of engagement, localities, cultural contexts, and epistemic standpoints Baker and Dove-Viebahn showcase. "Feminists generally share a belief in equality and justice for women," the editors note, but "they define the term in multiple ways, with different emphases and priorities" (Baker and Dove-Viebahn, "Introduction," 12). Public Feminisms's plural, intersectional scope is not just a methodological virtue. It also makes the collection fun to read. Part 3 focuses on "public writing and scholarship" and presents Dove-Viebahn's own experience with interviewing women in film for Ms. magazine—"an online platform lends itself to an immediacy not possible with print books" (Dove-Viebahn, "A 'Feminist Lens' on Activism and Inclusion in the Film and Television Industry," 251). It also features a women's, gender, and sexuality studies professor at Oregon State University who publishes on her Baptist faith—"My university press books reached audiences of hundreds across several years. A single piece in Ms. Magazine … can reach thousands in just a few days" (Shaw, "Feminism, Faith, and Public Scholarship," 271)—and a Turkish translator collective that makes one of the few international contributions to Public Feminisms. The collection's North American bias (which Baker and Dove-Viebahn acknowledge in their introduction) underlines the Turkish writers' central point: amplifying underrepresented voices—through translation and other radical actions—must be an explicit aim of public...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen's studies quarterlySame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207