The Public at Play: Gender and the Politics of Recreation in Post-War Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This text focuses on a moment of failed political idealism, when leisure meant much more than fun. Between 1945 and 1961 the government funded the hiring of a cadre of recreation directors in the villages, towns, and cities of Ontario. Liberal thinkers saw this funding as a way to foster a democratic and participatory society; working with these directors, municipalities could start grass-roots community activities, in the process conditioning mind and body for active citizenship. The ideals were high: women and men would play equal roles and the whole effort would be guided by and instilled with the democratic spirit of the emerging welfare state. The dream soon faltered and volunteers fell into petty roles or simply slid into consumerism, leaving power in a few familiar hands. Women and girls were pushed out of the process. This is an examination of just what went wrong. The intrinsic connection between the sidelining of women's leadership and the calcification of regional recreation schemes into bureacracies becomes all too apparent. Ultimately this evolves to be an examination of the many lines of force involved when high politics meets the entrenched value systems of communities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".