Women Organizations for Peace: Moving Beyond the Rhetoric of the Cyprus Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This research examines enduring women’s organizations working towards women’s rights and a peaceful solution to the Cyprus Problem which has taken precedence over gender equality on the island. This study was based on a 13-year period from 2001 to 2014 examining Hands Across the Divide (HAD), the Gender Advisory Team (GAT), and the Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies (MIGS) as important groups who have played a key role in women's activism that spans the long-standing partition of Cyprus. This qualitative research-based project applies a transnational feminist lens the following research questions: The central research questions for this study are: 1) How have women’s groups organized for peace? 2) What have been their key issues and organizing strategies? 3) What have been their organizing successes and challenges? I use feminist methods to collect data through participant observation, one-on-one interviews, and focus groups to show how women's organizing within these long-standing groups have played a key role in bicommunal women's activism on the island including the mobilization of the women, peace and security agenda during significant periods in Cypriot history. Each organization is examined through the multi-layered and fragmented ways that the demand for women’s rights has occurred on the island, as well the ways that multigenerational women have sought to make their voices heard in the midst of Cyprus Problem. I conclude with an analysis of how working against ethno-nationalist culture and the need to move beyond the binary of ethnicity and ethnic divisions has resulted in the fight against gendered violence and the marginalization of women’s rights. There is a need to develop a third space in which intersectionality allows women’s groups to engage island-wide with groups fighting other forms of oppression and to create opportunities to work together.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".