Indocile Bodies: Gender Identity and Strip Searches in Canadian Criminal Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Cet article se penche sur la question des sexes non normatifs et des sexualités dans le contexte du monde complexe des procédures criminelles. S'appuyant sur une lecture deForrester v. Peel (Regional Municipality) Police Services Board et al., soit une décision récente où une prisonnière transsexuelle alléguait avoir subi une discrimination en raison de son sexe, cet article fait le lien entre les fouilles à nu et un système plus large de pouvoir corporel. Les corps « trans » sont ciblés non seulement parce qu'ils sont perçus comme différents mais aussi parce que cette différence symbolise quelque chose de particulier, à savoir un échec des régimes qui réglementent les corps à partir d'une construction binaire, rigide et essentialiste du sexe. Ainsi, les corps « trans » deviennent à la fois la cible d'observations, de normalisations et d'examens non seulement de la part de la police, mais aussi de la société dans son ensemble.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".