Whose pride?: an institutional ethnography on participating in Toronto’s Pride Parade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigates how an institutional coordination of civic policies and organizational processes within Pride Toronto were brought to bear on the activist group Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA) in their attempts to participate in the 2010, 2011, and 2012 Toronto Pride Parades. Utilizing an institutional ethnography (IE), I explore this issue in two key ways. First, by mapping a work-text-work sequence of QuAIA’s experience in applying to march in the 2010 Parade, I demonstrate how the application process was subject to social relations that extended beyond Toronto Pride. Second, through the elaboration of processing interchanges, I demonstrate how the experiences of QuAIA were hooked into a series of translocal relations via Pride Toronto’s funding relationship to the City of Toronto. These translocal relations working through the City of Toronto were themselves varied, from pro-Zionist pressure on individual City councilors, to an alignment with anti-tax and arguably homophobic interests on council.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".