Women, High-Rise Condominiums and Curated Living: Canadian Hegemonic Itineraries of Female Empowerment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intense development of high-rise condominium buildings in the city of Toronto has been supported by state, media and industry-based narratives depicting empowered women whose achievements and increased purchasing power drive the “feminization” of the city’s real estate market. This article looks beneath the veneer of female empowerment constructed by these cultural narratives. It explores how state, industry-based and mass media constructions of homeownership and luxurious condominium lifestyles in Toronto have empowered local women from different racial, ethnic and class backgrounds. It also explores how this empowerment has allowed Canadian state and capitalist patriarchal formations to adjust and survive by accommodating women’s need and desire for independence, safety, choice, and consumer power, and by reproducing social distances between women and others, including non-humans and the natural world. By mapping and analyzing the occurrence and reiteration of these social distances and the hegemonic powers exerting them, this article contributes to feminist studies of cultures of vertical capitalism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".