Killing in Her Name: On White Womanhood and Canada's Military Occupation of Iraq
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout this thesis, I explore how the construction of white womanhood in Canada has influenced the state’s military expansion in Iraq post-9/11. Using a feminist discourse analysis of media representations and policy documents, I argue that white women are integral to the (re)production of imperial power by weaponizing feminist rhetoric to justify military interventions. In examining four national news agencies, I reveal that portrayals of Canadian womanhood center exclusively on whiteness, erasing intersectional experiences and marginalizing racialized identities. Moreover, my analysis of Canadian policy documents surrounding Operation IMPACT further demonstrates how feminist language is co-opted to frame militarization as a humanitarian duty, thereby obscuring the inherent violence of state interventions. Within this research, I challenge dominant narratives that depict feminist foreign policy as progressive, revealing instead how it upholds white supremacy and systemic violence. By re-centering the role of white women in these processes, I call for a critical reexamination of the intersection between gender, race, and militarism in contemporary Canadian state-building mechanisms
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.053 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
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".