Eyes wide open: stranger hospitality and the regulation of youth citizenship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across the Anglo-American world, a pervasive sense of wariness and concern about strangers continues to haunt influential discourses and practices that regulate and shape youth citizenship. In particular, (1) media-centred accounts of ‘stranger danger’, (2) dominant citizenship discourses taught in schools and (3) government policies regulating young people's civic lives, remain significant in shaping how strangers are made meaningful for youth. Through these discourses and practices, the stranger increasingly comes to be a fetish figure, a body and symbolic form whose very figurability is rendered a problem in the first instance. These developments are problematic, in large part because strangers are a necessary and enabling feature of modern democracies. Accordingly, in this paper, I examine the three aforementioned fields of discourse and practice as they have operated broadly over the past decade in Canada, Britain and the United States. I show how strangers are made difficult and dangerous others for youth and make clear how these constructions regulate and threaten a vibrant public world. I conclude by hinting at how stranger hospitality might be taken up differently in schools (and other public fora) as part of nurturing our collective democratic futures.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".