MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133015315

The Solidarity Encounter between Indigenous Women and White Women in a Contemporary Canadian Context

2015· dissertation· W7133015315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carol Lynne D'Arcangelis

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2015
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)IndigenousColonialismComplicitySubjectivitySolidarityContext (archaeology)White supremacy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation tracks the gendered operation of white settler liberal subjectivity at a specific site of settler colonial relations—the “solidarity encounter” between Indigenous women and white women in Canada. Through in-depth qualitative analysis of interviews and self-reflection (as a white settler woman ally), I examine the encounter’s intersubjective relations, shining the theoretical spotlight on how white women negotiate our tenuous status as settlers. Attentive to the complexity of these relations, including how white women allies grapple with our dominant positionality, I signal the perniciousness of white settler liberal subjectivity and the deep quest for legitimacy/innocence at its core. This quest, I argue, manifests itself as a white desire for proximity to Indigenous women, which in turn takes various forms and is often experienced by Indigenous women as invasive. I dedicate three chapters to mapping the sometimes subtle expressions of this desire (e.g., the need for acceptance, inclusion, forgiveness, healing, empowerment/purpose, friendship) and its role in liberal self-making projects, i.e., how it serves to negate colonial hierarchies and/or white settler women’s colonial complicity therein. Further, I develop the concept of the “impulse to solidarity”—the bundle of desires and discursive practices that propels white settler women in their pursuit of proximity, an impulse related to, but distinct from the “helping imperative” (Heron, 2007). White women allies find it difficult to resist the gendered dictates of liberal subjectivity, which in a settler colonial context demand our reproduction as legitimate national subjects vis-à-vis Indigenous women Others. Despite the inescapability of the “colonial present” (Gregory, 2004), I also note a cautious optimism among participants regarding the possibility of non-colonizing solidarity. I propose a framework for reconfiguring intersubjective relations in the solidarity encounter best encapsulated by the directive “step back, but not out.” Struck by pervasive spatial references in participant narratives, I characterize the problem (colonizing solidarity) and its solution (non-colonizing solidarity) in spatialized terms—white settler women must interrogate and curb our solidarity impulse and related practices of proximity. We must recognize when settler liberal self-interest takes centre stage, compels us to “come too close” and diminishes the collective political work of solidarity.

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)0.004
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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0660.023
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→