No One Is Disposable: Towards Feminist Models of Transformative Justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks toward a future of prison abolition by arguing for feminist models of Transformative Justice (TJ), a strategy that responds to harm by aiming to transform the conditions that make violence possible. Autoethnographic reflections of the author’s experience volunteering with Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA), a TJ initiative based on friendship and accountability working to reintegrate people incarcerated for perpetrating sexualized violence back into communities, are combined with a critical analysis of the existing literature about TJ principles and initiatives. Insights from the author’s experience with COSA are examined for their potential use in a feminist TJ context. This article considers Philly Stands Up as an example of a more radical, grassroots TJ model, explores what examining this model in light of COSA’s techniques might suggest for a sustainable feminist TJ framework, and proposes several small steps forward for TJ movements to work toward a future in which no one is disposable.
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 | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.115 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".