<i>Not</i> a home: Shelter families living in Canadian motels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the precarity and mobility of neoliberalism, there has been increasing interest into constructs of ‘home’. In this article, the author defines ‘home’ as an active and relational process encompassing interactions between materiality and immateriality. Participant observation research conducted amongst shelter families in Toronto, Canada, living in motels can shed light on some of these larger global conversations about what ‘home’ is, and particularly, what it is not. These motels are utilized as part of the City of Toronto Shelter, Support and Housing Administration providing free shelter to impoverished families in need. Social workers, shelter managers and local faith group volunteers assert that the motels should be considered ‘home’ and the problem is that the women living in the motels with their children treat the physical space as transitory. In contrast, the women assert that the motel space is not a home and can never be made into one. The author argues that for these women, there are three critical elements missing in the motel: control over space, safety/security and privacy. The assertion that the motel space is not a home is a significant form of resistance to the regulatory bureaucratic structuring of daily life. However, despite this absence of home, the women feel strong identification as mothers and have formed systems of informal shared networks. This research helps to further illuminate not only our understandings of ‘home’, but also deepen and complicate normative associations equating ‘home’ with physical structure, domesticity and family.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it