The Midwest Feminist Papers: A Facsimile Edition 1980–1997. Part I (1980–1983)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mary Jo Deegan and Michael R. Hill, compilers. The Midwest Feminist Papers: A Facsimile Edition 1980–1997, with prefaces and author indices by Mary Jo Deegan and Michael R. Hill. 3 volumes: Part I (1980–1983) The Midwest Feminist Papers was a creative, group-generated initiative that gave voice to the scholarly questions, research interests, and social concerns of a growing cohort of Midwestern feminist sociology graduate students and their feminist faculty mentors during the last quarter of the Twentieth Century. They were active members of Midwest Sociologists for Women in Society, a regional expression of the larger national Sociologists for Women in Society. Never intended as a full-fledged professional journal, issues of The Midwest Feminist Papers were intermittently distributed in limited numbers, at cost, during annual meetings of the Midwest Sociological Society and quickly went out of print. As a result, very few copies of these “time capsule” documents of late 20th century feminist sociology survived. In 1984, the late Carla Howery, writing from her office in the American Sociological Association, assessed the role of The Midwest Feminist Papers: “[It] is one of the nicest traditions, young as it is, in the full range of activities of the national and regional chapters of Sociologists for Women in Society.” Here, Nebraska’s Mary Jo Deegan (a co-founder of the journal) and Michael R. Hill (her life-partner and a subsequent contributor) have painstakingly reconstructed the entire run of The Midwest Feminist Papers. This facsimile edition is here reproduced in three volumes: Part I (1980–1983), Part II (1984–1986), and Part III (1991–1997)
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".