Transformations in LGBT consumer landscapes and leisure spaces in the neoliberal city
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines recent transformations in consumer landscapes and leisure spaces in inner-city LGBT neighbourhoods in Sydney, Australia and Toronto, Canada. In doing so, we rethink orthodox positions on neoliberalism and homonormativity by considering practices of sociability and commensality. We contend that closer attention to interactions between mainstream and LGBT consumers is key to understanding these urban changes. Mainstream-LGBT interactions encompass both congruent and competing practices, actualised in both physical encounters in consumer landscapes and discursive reputations of those spaces. These relations are increasingly important owing to the progressive integration of LGBT neighbourhoods into urban cultures and economies. Simultaneously, the materialisation of diverse LGBT landscapes in Sydney and Toronto has generated a relational geography of ‘traditional’ gay villages and ‘emergent’ queer-friendly neighbourhoods. We argue that practices and spaces of leisure-based consumption are emerging in different forms across these neighbourhoods and between Sydney and Toronto. To illustrate this, we deploy a discourse analysis of mainstream newspaper articles on LGBT neighbourhoods over 2004–2014, supplemented by relevant LGBT press releases in Toronto, focusing on the use, meaning and social significance of leisure-based consumption sites – clubs, bars, cafés, restaurants. We find the balance of daytime/night-time leisure spaces, which have both social and material affordances, is a key discriminator across the neighbourhoods, both within and between the cities. Daytime consumer landscapes are more often framed as sociable and inclusive within the media, while night-time landscapes are perceived as divisive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".