Lesbotopie : proposition conceptuelle pour une géographie féministe des spatialités lesbiennes: Bifurcation critique depuis l'hétérotopie foucaldienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This working paper introduces lesbotopia as a conceptual tool for analysing the production of lesbian and queer spatialities. Drawing on immersive ethnographic fieldwork conducted since 2022 at the QueerRanch Festival in Skala Eresos (Lesbos, Greece) — combining participant observation, field notebooks, and semi-structured interviews — lesbotopia designates a spatial, corporeal, and political assemblage in which the lesbian/queer subject experiences a shift in the normative centre of gravity of the space: the phenomenological threshold at which queerness ceases to be the deviation and becomes the organising principle. The paper provides a critical engagement with Foucault's six principles of heterotopia, identifying four structural limitations (gender blindness, heteronormative resonance, configurationist bias, disembodiment). It constructs lesbotopia on three theoretical pillars — territorialisation (Deleuze and Guattari), situated queer utopia (Muñoz), and queer phenomenology (Ahmed) — and deploys four original conceptual operators: the lesbian spatial trajectory, the infrastructure of friendship, the suspension of hypervigilance, and lesbotopian temporality. A systematic review of the literature on lesbian geographies confirms that the six conceptual propositions developed here are original contributions not pre-empted in existing scholarship. This paper constitutes the first systematic English-language formulation of lesbotopia, building on a communication at the Colloque Solidarités Lesbo-Queers (Montréal, March 2026).
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 | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.072 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 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".