MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020524010

Lawbreaking as lawmaking: redefining women's everyday resistances to injustice

2019· dissertation· en· W7020524010 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFeminism, Gender, and Sexuality Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjusticeResistance (ecology)State (computer science)Punitive damagesCovertLawmakingCivil disobedienceEconomic JusticeFace (sociological concept)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, I offer a new understanding of lawbreaking, particularly when committed by women belonging to racially and/or ethnically oppressed minorities, and especially in cases that do not fall within the traditional criteria of civil disobedience. I interpret their lawbreaking as a legitimate manifestation of resistance, aimed at correcting injustices, and as a viable form of lawmaking, capable of jurisgenerating, to use Robert Cover's term: creating legal meanings and mobilizing socio-legal change and reconciliation. Shifting the focus from the big, 'meta' and 'heroic' stories of mass disobedience committed in public by politically motivated people, my thesis suggests paying attention to the daily, 'small', private, and secret forms of 'everyday resistances' committed by women. These cases could be as intimate and covert as a woman putting makeup on her face under a burqa. Using the body as a legal site of defiance, the thesis particularly focuses on two contexts in which it explores women's resistance and agency: a) Lawbreaking and resistance through land in Israel, namely squatting in public housing by Mizrahi women in Israel; and b) Resistance 'through the womb,' by women having abortions in Canada, pre-and post-Morgentaler.Taking in particular a critical legal pluralist approach, shifting and deepening the focus from state law to society to the individual herself, the thesis focuses on women's jurisgenerative capacity to both transform state law, and/or create their own laws. Lawmaking is demonopolized, so that the state is not the sole 'producer', and 'the turning point' in the creation of legal meanings. However, unlike other critical approaches to law, the thesis does not offer various interpretations to law and legal phenomena from within state law, offering the theoretical and analytical means for interpreting the meaning of women's voice and agency in, or about, the law. Rather, the thesis approaches women's acts as law/s, as legal narratives in and of themselves, capable of creating legal meanings, and changing and altering the meaning of what we perceive as law.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicFeminism, Gender, and Sexuality StudiesFrench-language works237,207