The entangled war faces of Naked Women: living with the invocation of antimonies, absurdities, conflicts, contradictions, and incongruities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is a gathering together of the conflicts threaded into the lives that we live as transformative university educators. We have both resistance and willingness to explore such processes of selving, and so draw on the embodied ethnographies of our academic colleagues across different decades and contexts to do so (e.g. Leitch 2006, Ortega, 2023). Aware of the complexities and potential triggering of the phrase ‘Naked Women’ (NW), we use it nonetheless and question what being a Naked Woman (NW) means and what it means to be a Naked Women (NW). Caught between inner wars and outer oppression, NW have and hold access to an anchoring force sourced from a power of authenticity but are weighed heavily by it. In elite, well-clothed, and mask-wearing spaces the presence of NW annoys, irritates, and offends. In these elite arenas, NW become objects of vitriol, symbolic aggression, symbolic violence and/or are used for titillation and tokenism. Above all, they are considered to be so disposable, to be used until they are done, that there is not a hint of sustenance, maintenance, or restoration. So, the War Face of the Naked Woman comes to be. You know the War Faces of the Naked Woman by her doings. Her choice is to not follow the ‘rules of the game’ despite knowing that it will cost her. She is called naïve, stupid, unwise, self-sabotaging, incapable of self- control, but resists these narratives and anchors her power forward. With neither a confessional nor singular stance, we examine the conflicts of the entangled War Faces of Naked Women because we want to prepare the ground for new methods and ways of growing radical transformative agency. Diffracting the conflictual motives with(in) our disciplines and across our contemporary workplaces further emboldens our praxis for equitable action on pressing social needs.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.074 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".