In the Name of the National Multicultural Family: The Documentation of Honour Killings and the Pedagogy of Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on Shelley Saywell’s documentary film about honour killings, In the Name of the Family, which won the Best Canadian Feature Award at the 2010 HotDocs Documentary Film Festival. Saywell stated that her hope in making this documentary was that it would help educate in order to break the cycle of abuse. This goal will be explored to see if in fact this documentary can allow the audience to hear these young women who are the victims of honour killings and whether this translates into the pedagogic potential for which Saywell hopes. Saywell’s documentary is framed within a binaristic “clash of cultures” narrative, where the fate of these young Muslim women are the limit case of a crisis of multicultural tolerance. This framing obscures the material realities which underpin gendered violence and racial exclusion in Canada even as it secures the national fantasy of a tolerant multicultural society. Ultimately, this article argues that the epistemological constraining of the patriarchal violence in this film as a specific form of culturalized and essentialized patriarchal traumatic violence serves only to entrench a larger project of white settler multicultural nationalism and limits the possibilities of knowing to the primacy of the viewing subject.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".