Politics of Planetary Reproduction and the Children of Other Worlds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers possible futures for human space settlements through the life story and experiences of David Vetter—a child born with severe combined immunodeficiency who became known in popular media as the “bubble boy.” Lynn Margulis imagined the creation of ecosystems and human settlements on another planet could be an act of Gaia reproducing by budding, through ecopoiesis. Thinking with Margulis about humans as holobionts, our species is both constituted by and embedded within communities of organisms and ecologies. As holobionts we may not be able to live outside of these communities and systems or away from Earth, even if we can temporarily survive without them. Placed within an evolutionary framework, techno-capitalist imaginaries of space settlement limit conceptions of planetary reproduction to heteronormative models of ecopoiesis which promote competition as a key driver of evolution instead of cooperation. Technologically mediated survival along with forced reproduction of holobionts within Earth-like systems and could lead to suffering and isolation like David Vetter’s forced survival in a bubble. I propose alternative liberatory modes of conceptualizing and materializing space migration (including queer and decolonized forms of reproduction) which better respect the Earth, its inhabitants, as well as extraterrestrial planets, landscapes, lives, and possibilities. Cite as: Oman-Reagan, Michael P. “Politics of Planetary Reproduction and the Children of Other Worlds.” Futures. (Forthcoming, 2019)
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".