Can We Be Proud Of Pride? A Discussion on Intersectionality in Current Canadian Pride Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores the relationship between intersectionality and Pride, by critiquing and offering solutions for some of Pride's failings.A brief history of the gay civil rights movement helps to situate current Pride events, with a focus on the Nanaimo 2016 Pride parade as a site to explore the concept of intersectionality. Themes of racism, ableism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, as well as homonormativity—internal and external to the LGBT community—are discussed. Upon examination, a series of possible solutions to these trappings are offered, most prominently being an opening of dialogue within the LGBT community. This essay argues that, while Pride is a necessary source of LGBT representation, it often fails to observe the intersectionality within its community, resulting in racism, ableism, sexism, homophobia, classism, and homonormativity. The ways in which Pride can harbour and nurture toxic mindsets of discrimination is a focal point in this essay,
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.095 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.026 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".