Crisis epistemologies: a case for queer feminist digital ethnography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crisis marks our lives more than ever before. It defines the ongoing violence of capitalism, nationalism, neoliberalism, gendered and racialized oppressions, and life in the era of the Anthropocene. In addition to this, crisis plays a crucial role in queer and trans studies, which seeks to expose the crises inherent to regimes of ‘normativity’. Within this context, this article asks – what constitutes crisis epistemologies? How can we study the unpredictable effects of ongoing crises? What are the ethical imperatives of such research? I argue that queer feminist digital ethnographies can be one method to map crisis epistemologies, for three reasons. First, the interdisciplinarity of queer feminist digital ethnographies attunes them to the messiness of crisis. Second, these ethnographies reimagine the field as a rhizomatic network, enabling a mapping of how crisis resignifies relationalities. Third, queer feminist digital ethnographies deploy practices of speculation and fabulation that trace the ongoing resignations of crises alongside building imaginations of worlds without crises, therefore acting as a tool that constructs transformative futures.
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 | 0.022 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".