MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413681346 · doi:10.1080/17521483.2025.2545098

Queer of colour utopias – how lesbian feminist vampires can help

2025· article· en· W4413681346 on OpenAlexaff
Diksha Kale

Bibliographic record

VenueLaw and Humanities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianQueerSociologyArtLawGender studiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fictional works that engage with issues of oppression and marginalization hold utopian potential for queer racialized persons. Queer of colour utopianism is integral for the materialization of queer justice, but its discussion in the context of fiction and law is often limited to fictional utopian societies. Building on the idea that a better world must first be imagined before it can be created, this article argues that reading and engaging with ‘visionary fiction’ is a utopian exercise that benefits the goals of social justice. The article begins with a brief outline of the political implications of the term ‘queer’ and connects that in detail with the lesbian feminist ethics of the vampires in Jewelle Gomez's 1991 novel The Gilda Stories. By underpinning the utopian impulses of Gomez's vampires with José Esteban Muñoz's queer of colour utopianism, this article articulates a broader cultural understanding of utopias and their relevance for social justice visualization.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.030
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaw and HumanitiesSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207