5 research outputs found
A viper and engine of the devil : The violent woman and female/female violence in eighteenth-century fiction
This dissertation argues that portraits of violent women and of female/female violence in Roxana, Clarissa, Evelina, The Wrongs of Women, and Mansfield Park played an important role in a shift in paradigms for female nature and normative femininity which took place during the eighteenth century. The early paradigm justified overt male control of women by claiming that female violence was the result of defects in female nature. The later paradigm defined woman as passive, required women to be self-policing in order to be considered feminine, and shifted the locus of control of female violence to women themselves. This study examines these two paradigms as they are represented in five novels written between 1724 and 1814 and explores differences between male and female writers\u27 construction of the violent woman and female/female violence. Chapter 1 summarizes current studies of female violence, explores the role eighteenth century print culture played in the construction of eighteenth-century and twentieth-century beliefs about the gendered qualities of violence, provides an historical context for discussion of female/female violence, and briefly outlines the contributions misogynist satire, conduct literature, and the woman\u27s periodical made to the novel\u27s definitions of female violence. Chapter 2 analyzes Defoe\u27s traditional, hierarchical view of female/female violence as the result of female refusal to submit willingly to male authority and as a sign of moral and spiritual degeneration. Chapter 3 analyzes Richardson\u27s definitions of the violent woman as masculine and physically disgusting and explores the ramifications of his argument that female will must serve as the principal means of suppressing sexuality and violence in the female personality. Chapter 4 examines Burney\u27s transitional position between the two paradigms, her exploration of the sociological and psychological causes of female/female violence, and her suggestions for solutions. Chapter 5 examines Wollstonecraft\u27s revisioning of Defoe\u27s and Richardson\u27s violent women and her reformation of the violent woman through female bonding and maternal compassion. Chapter 6 explores Austen\u27s more hopeless vision of the triumph of the ideology of female passivity and her argument that female passivity itself encourages covert female/female violence
Behind Closed Doors at the White House: How Politics Trumps Protection of Public Health, Worker Safety, and the Environment
Recommended from our members
Efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies, sotrovimab and BRII-196 plus BRII-198, for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (TICO): a randomised controlled trial
We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19.
In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978.
Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50–72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74–1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67–1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74–1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68–1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91–1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88–1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90.
Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19.
US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Spee