Bibliographic record
Abstract
While girls are often consigned to the shadows in studies of colonialism, Empire’s daughters uncovers the ways in which girls and ideas of girlhood were central to the construction of colonial identities and societies and ideas of whiteness. Girls were heralded as empire builders and, especially during times of imperial uncertainty, were crucial to the creation and maintenance of class, gender, and racial hierarchies. Yet girls’ involvement in the empire was anything but straightforward. They not only supported – directly and indirectly – racialised systems of colonial power but also resisted them. To explore these complexities of girls’ participation in the empire, Empire’s daughters examines the Girls’ Friendly Society, an organisation that emerged in late Victorian Britain and developed into a global society with branches throughout the empire. The book charts the society’s origins and growth and its later decline in the interwar era. It also explores how, through its multifaceted imperial education and emigration programmes, the society constructed ideas of girlhood, race, and empire that then circulated globally. The book employs a multi-sited framework that examines girlhood in different areas of the empire, including Britain, India, South Africa, and Australia, and utilises a range of sources, including correspondences, scrapbooks, photographs, and newsletters, to provide new insights into girls’ experiences of and engagement with colonialism. Through this study of the Girls’ Friendly Society, Girlhood and whiteness explores the micropolitics of colonialism and whiteness and argues that understandings of colonialism remain incomplete without considerations of girls and girlhood.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.936 | 0.912 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".