Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following Patricia Monture, I argue in this article that the law is not a transformative arbiter of justice but, rather, is actively invested in the recovery and recuperation of colonial dominance and the affirmation of settler sovereignty. I illustrate this argument through a critical reading of McIvor v The Registrar, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, a progressive case that challenged sexism in the criteria established by the federal government for recognizing “Indianness.” This case had the potential to correct the history of sex discrimination in the Indian Act and to reconcile the matter of racialized injustice as it is realized through, and inseparable from, sexism, but it ultimately failed. In fact, the case (re-)told a raceless story of sexism as well as an original Eurocentric fiction that separates “woman” from “Indian.” This case thus prevented us from seeing the inequality of treatment that indigenous women and their descendants—indeed, all status Indians—face as racialized peoples. Canadian law, I argue, continues as it has over the last four decades to mobilize “Indianness” as a strategy to dispossess and undermine the sovereignty of indigenous peoples.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".