Subverting Colonial Choreographies of Memory: Drag the Red and the March for Tina Fontaine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Winnipeg, Manitoba is located on the sacred territory of the Anishinaabeg, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota, Dene, and the Métis Nation. Like most Canadian cityscapes, though, these unceded lands are the grounds on which Jets hockey, the Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR), and the Royal Winnipeg Ballet (RWB) take centre stage. Punctuating the city’s skyline from the historic downtown Forks site, the CMHR marks Winnipeg’s rising sense of self as a tolerant multicultural centre. However, as Indigenous-led choreographies of assembly continue to demonstrate, these sites of settler life are the same sites where Indigenous women and men are brutalized. In this essay, I specifically move with the February 2018 March for Tina Fontaine and the annual Drag the Red initiative as my objects of analysis. Looking closely at gendered racial violence, performativity, and necropolitics, I discuss how these public assemblies spotlight settler space as always already ghosted and constituted by Indigenous bodies. In particular, I explore how the March and Drag the Red subvert the sweeping grand narratives of human rights and liberal multiculturalism rehearsed by the CMHR, The Forks, and the Red River, where colonial violence is reiterated as an ever more insidious, moving target. The march and Drag the Red underscore how Indigenous people continue to fall from the national story. However, the rigorous physical labour performed by those who march and dredge is a form of radical care for those disappeared and site of Indigenous resurgence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".