Introduction to the special issue “Mobilising queer joy: Establishing queer joy studies”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our introduction to the special issue “Mobilising Queer Joy” reflects an urgent need for queer joy studies amidst a sociopolitical climate that feels increasingly ruinous. We reject the ‘joy deficit’ in sociological research that fixates on homogenous, misery-filled visions of 2SLGBTQIA+ existence, and which is severed from the profound beauty of queer love, queer and trans joy, gender euphoria, and the strength and depth of 2SLGBTQIA+ community care and chosen families. In addition to introducing the six articles in the special issue from authors in Canada, the Philippines, Australia, and the US, we aim to establish queer joy studies by articulating the affective power of queer joy for collective resistance and social transformation. Queer joy is more than a kitschy slogan on a tote bag or splashed on the side of a big bank’s Pride float; it is a collective experience that allows us to feel more alive and connected to our personal capacities and power. The queer joy we are interested in is dangerous to empire and colonial powers. It does not deny the relationship with ambivalence, rage, and grief, and instead mobilises these affects to confront injustices in our existing social order. Some of the questions we ask include: How does queer joy act as world-making and dream mapping of new, more sustainable futures? How might we further theorize and mobilise queer joy as a disruption to settler colonial, carceral logics? How might the transformative power of queer joy be amplified to fragment and challenge the rise of fascism and populism that seeks to exterminate it?
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.022 |
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".