Bibliographic record
Abstract
The introduction and 10 essays in this volume address questions about how feminist scholars conceptualize gender and view it in relationship to other attributes of individuals and of social systems. The authors strive for intersectional analyses broadening that approach beyond the gender, race and class paradigm to include sexuality, employing a variety of methodologies, and arguing that intersectionality is, or should be, not just theory, but praxis as well. The topics include the empowerment of women globally; the relationship of gender to international migration; gender differences in organizational participation; heteronormativity in organizations and in the media; the ways that the global affects the local in legislation, the workplace and the academy; the relationship between positive stereotypes of women and support for women's rights; and essentialist themes in men's movements. The discussions of globalization and empowerment and of migration are explicitly transnational in perspective. The remaining essays analyze data gathered in particular locations, but all have broader implications. Three nation-specific essays focus on organizational participation in Brazil, feminism in the Canadian academy, and sexual harassment legislation in Japan. Those on the media, social movements and voluntary organizations, and on modern prejudice are based on data from the United States. All of the authors and co-authors, whether professors emerita or graduate students, are trained in the social sciences. Nevertheless, the essays reflect the increasingly interdisciplinary approach to data and methods that characterizes contemporary feminist writing and research
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".