Negotiating racialised (un)belonging: Black LGBTQ resistance in Toronto’s gay village
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the ways in which homeless Black queer and trans youth embody and perform everyday acts of temporal and spatial resistance in Toronto’s gay village. By analysing interviews, mental maps and photographs from my research with homeless lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and Two-Spirit (LGBTQ2) youth, I present how homeless Black queer and trans youth counter the whiteness and anti-Black racism they frequently experience in the village through acts of remembering and placemaking. Specifically, I argue that despite the small-scale reach of the everyday resistance that manifests in our interviews, temporal and spatial resistance challenge the whitewashing of Toronto’s gay village, which is particularly crucial in a moment when the village is centred in conversations of anti-Black racism in the city’s queer community. Engaging in these forms of everyday resistance illustrates the ways in which homeless Black LGBTQ youth instruct their own placemaking in an otherwise uninhabitably racialised neighbourhood, shift narratives of their experiences in processes of knowledge production and spark processes of their own politicisation and community building.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| 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".