Reimagining Parenting Possibilities: Towards Intimate Justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the heart of this paper is a collaboratively created script representing a line of analysis from the Reimagining Parenting Possibilities Project. The script is performed as a forum theatre scene used to disseminate findings from this ongoing research project. Forum theatre, an exemplar of Augusto Boal’s “theatre of the oppressed,” invites audience members into a scene, inventing through embodied performance and improvisation analyses and interventions in shared social dilemmas (Boal, 2006). The project rests upon our joint investments in exploring how the denial and containment of parenthood for people labeled with intellectual and developmental disabilities stems from enduring ableist views as to who is deemed “fit” to raise future citizens, and related efforts to erase disability. We introduce this work with a prologue – offering context for the ableist dynamic and intimate injustices that unfold in the scene. We also provide some background on how we developed the scene, attending to the democratizing and transformative potential of our methodology. Finally, by way of an epilogue, we sketch a number of questions about the scene’s potential to promote intimate and disability justice.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".