How They Learned to Stop Worrying and Love (the) Restrictions? Reimagining COVID-19 Lockdowns-as-Liberative and Restorative:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The site of “one of the world’s strictest and longest running stay-at-home mandates,” lockdowns in Ontario have become a source of contention within provincial public discourse, often understood as restrictive, exhausting, and detestable. Amongst this, however, there exists a group of Ontarians for whom staying-at-home is conversely perceived as liberating and restorative – a group (n=29) of Somali Canadian mothers. Twenty-nine (n=29) individual interviews with Ottawa-based Somali mothers revealed a converging reality which diverges significantly from dominant public opinion: rather than restrictive and isolating, lockdowns are perceived by these women as liberative and restorative, for they offer a prolonged respite from the anti-Black racism and Islamophobia negotiated in settler colonial space. The locked down Somali home provides its doubly racialized (Black, Muslim) inhabitants the room to exist without consequence, in part by forging physical and psychic distance between Somali mothers, their kin, and the daily navigations of anti-Black and Islamophobic subordination. This paper engages a Black feminist lens to critically consider how mothers contend – in-house – with the marginalization their Black Muslim children negotiate in urban public space. By leaning on the Somali mothers’ perceptions of lockdown, this work wages the salient argument that, for certain marginalized groups in settler colonial societies, private space provides considerably more liberation relative to their public counterpart. The first of its kind to read lockdowns-as-liberative and restorative, this article contributes to Black feminist sociology, Black Canadian geographies, as well as Somali diasporic studies writ large.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".