MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285676582 · doi:10.29173/crossings42

A Critical Analysis of the Term Barbaric Cultural Practices through An Examination of the S-7 Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act and the Harper Conservatives’ Discourses

2022· article· en· W4285676582 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fea Jerulen Gelvezon

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcuseCitizenshipMulticulturalismGovernment (linguistics)MilitarismImmigrationSociologyLawNationalismPolitical scienceGender studiesPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2014, Canada’s Conservative government introduced the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act (Bill S-7), with the aim to protect Canadian women and girls, especially Brown and Muslim women, against gendered-based violence that uses culture as an excuse. However, in the context of the war on terror and anti-Muslim discourses during the Harper years, the title of Bill S-7 appears contradictory to its intended goal. The Conservative government engaged in activities that appear to ignore the interests of women, especially minority women in Canada (Olwan 2013). Through a critical discourse analysis of Conservative Ministers’ Parliamentary hansards during the debates for Bill S-7, this paper finds that the conservatives’ mobilization of the term barbaric cultural practices has three functions: Bill S-7 sends a strong message that Canada will not tolerate barbaric cultural practices; the Government has a responsibility to pursue a humanitarian immigration system; Bill S-7 would protect all women and girls from gendered-based violence that uses culture as an excuse. Using Sara Farris’ femonationalism framework, this paper argues that Bill S-7’s three functions advance Conservatives’ nationalist and neoliberal interests through the enforcement of a type of “patriotic neoliberal citizenship,” which promotes Canadian values as militarism, close ties with the British Crown, and economic independence over multiculturalism, among others (Abu-Laban 2018).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0440.059
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts JournalSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207