“We’re Not Going to Stop for Anything": Concerned Aboriginal Women and the Constitution Express
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On 20 July 1981 a group of Indigenous women calling themselves the “Concerned Aboriginal Women,” arrived at the Department of Indian Affairs (DIA) regional headquarters in downtown Vancouver. Once inside the fifteenth-floor offices, the women informed staff they were there to stage an occupation.The Concerned Aboriginal Women (CAW) was not a longstanding group, or even a very organized one. It had formed spontaneously the previous day when several women gathered at the Constitution Express Potlatch in Lytton, British Columbia and, realizing the extent of their shared grievances against the Canadian government, decided they needed to act. The creation of the CAW built on existing political efforts in communities that summer (using the potlatch as a launch point for the group), but it also departed from them by creating a splinter group made up solely of women. The CAW, which would go on to take part in fundraising activities to support the Express and travel to Europe with the delegation, provides an important window into the gender dynamics of the Constitution Express movement. Examining the community potlatches, fundraising efforts, and Concerned Aboriginal Women’s activities, I suggest that the Consistution Express movement, which largely existed within the male-dominated Chiefs’ organization, was influenced and driven by women. Women’s involvement in the movement was not only paramount to its longevity and breadth, but ensured that everyday issues facing community members were discussed alongside of patriation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.056 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".