Ottawa’s National Capital Commission Conservation Officers and the Policing of Public Park Sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Capital Commission (NCC) is an organization responsible for so-called ‘beautification’ and land development around Canada’s capital city, Ottawa. This paper examines surveillance of public sex by NCC conservation officers in Ottawa’s parks. Conceptualizing NCC conservation officer work as policing, I analyze conservation officer occurrence reports obtained through federal-level access to information requests to examine how public male with male sexual activity is problematized and criminalized. This case study of NCC conservation officer work demonstrates how notions of so-called ‘appropriate’ sexuality and space usage can be shaped and reinforced through policing and surveillance conducted by governance agents who have peace officer status. Conservation officers have been excluded from studies of policing because of a bias towards conventional municipal officers in the policing literature as well as the marginal status of specialized enforcement agents. Contributing to the literature on policing of public sex, my analysis of conservation officer occurrence reports suggests that even when bylaws and park regulations concerning erotic acts are written in gender-neutral and innocuous language, these bylaws are enforced in ways that discriminate against public homoeroticism. Though NCC officer policing is integral to attempts at purifying urban space, because of their mandate to promote the spirit of Canada in the lands surrounding Ottawa I argue that sexuality is also a matter of national character for the NCC.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".