Emancipation in an Islamophobic age: Finding agency in "nonrecognition," "refusal," and "self-recognition"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing Islamophobia literature has aptly illustrated how the tragedy of 9/11 and the discourses that followed have situated ‘Muslims’ in a multifaceted system of reductive caricatures and security structures such that the Muslim subject “can at a moment’s notice be erected as [an] object of supervision and discipline” (Morey and Yaqin 2011: 5-6). The current paper builds off this structural analysis, however orients attention to the agents that sit at the receiving end of this architecture. Examining an annual multi-medium exhibit featuring the artistic works of Muslim women in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), I ask what (re)imaginings and possibilities of place, voice and emancipation are available in our Islamophobic age? What possibilities can we detangle from closely engaging with the negotiation patterns of the agents living the everyday of Islamophobia. (Mus)interpreted - an amalgamation of misinterpreted and Muslim interpreted - is an exhibit oriented towards uncovering-dismantling-and-rectifying the politics of living and finding ‘home’ amidst the backdrop of the problematic subject frame. The paper will engage with the ‘artistic statements’ of nearly two dozen multi-medium curated pieces, and ask what possibilities of place, voice and emancipation remain for the post 9/11 Muslim subject in our increasingly securitized and racialized age. There will also be a sustained attention given to issues of recognition/misrecognition /nonrecognition, broadly asking if the politics of recognition is framed as the site for emancipatory re-imaginings, or as the curators put it, as the grounds for “inclusive-future[s]”?
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".