“Where u from, who u wit?!” Black Pride Festivals as Itinerant Hospitality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the phenomenon of Black Pride festivals. Initially intended as a form of community building during the HIV/AIDS crisis in the 1990s in select cities, Black Pride is both a celebration of Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender + (LGBT+) life and a space for political organizing. The model of Black Pride would be adopted throughout the United States and, internationally, in the United Kingdom and South Africa. While there are no “official” Black Pride festivals in Canada, there is a long-standing history of diasporic travel by Black LGBT+ Torontonians that have sought out these festivals as a site of affirmation of their identities and experiences. Blockorama, a one-day cultural festival that celebrates Black LGBT+ individuals during the Pride Toronto festivities, shares a similar history. Now in its twenty-first year, the story of Blockorama illustrates the challenges of visibility and recognition faced by Black LGBT+ communities within broader LGBT+ communities. As a snapshot from my current ethnographic and archival research on Black Pride, this analysis takes the form of a transnational comparison of the structural and political challenges faced by organizers of these events. Of particular concern is the confluence of anti-Black racism and the homonormative political priorities LGBT+ leaders that have shaped “mainstream” Pride festivals, rendering them increasingly corporate driven. Thus, this article specifically attends to the relationship between the spatial regulation and surveillance of Black LGBT+ bodies when moments of celebration are enacted in spaces that are seen as being “out of place.” Conceptually, these moments of disruption are understood as an “itinerant hospitality” that engenders spaces of conviviality between Black LGBT+ communities and the individuals who cultivate their identities often in transit.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".