L'Affaire Hérouxville in context: Conflicting narratives on Islam, Muslim women, and identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In January 2007 the small town of Hérouxville in Quebec, Canada, introduced a set of codes of conduct called Normes de vie de la municipalit d'Hérouxville (Standards of Living for Residents of Hérouxville). Despite the proclamation that these rules do not target any particular religion or culture, the language of the document suggests that the Muslim community was being targeted. This article seeks to analyse the context within which dominant discourses on Islam have been developed and carried forward in western societies. I will argue that the standards are a re-articulation of a centuries-long colonial construction of the Muslim Other. They are also symptomatic of a deep-rooted commitment to cultural preservation in Quebec society that (from time to time) lends itself to xenophobic sentiments. The article makes two recommendations on how to start remedying the overwhelmingly negative image of Muslims in Canada and the rest of the western world: (1) a better representation of Muslims in the mainstream media in Canada and other western countries, and (2) a sustainable multicultural communication infrastructure that enables active participation of citizens, including immigrant groups, in the public realm.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.032 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".