Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1924, the Bolshevik regime began an unprecedented campaign to forcibly emancipate the Muslim women of Tajikistan.The emancipatory reforms included unveiling women, passing progressive family code laws, and educating women.By the 1950s, the Soviet regime largely succeeded in putting an end to veiling, child marriage, polygamy, and bride payments.Yet today there is a resurgence in these practices the Bolsheviks claimed to have eliminated.Coerced Liberation reveals that the Soviet regime transformed the lives of urban women within a single generation but without lasting effect.Drawing on unique primary sources, the book examines why this occurred.It addresses questions that are pertinent to ongoing debates in the international arena: What happens when an outside force attempts to modernize a society deeply rooted in centuries of patriarchal norms and values?In what ways can a devout religious rural community respond to, survive, and adapt to such interventions?And how does a state-centred, top-down approach towards women's emancipation work?Coerced Liberation presents critical insights for readers interested in gender dynamics within Muslim communities, the roles of women in Islam, the resurgence of Islam in former colonial territories, the effectiveness of a top-down approach towards women's movements, and more.
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) | 0.010 | 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".