MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1500190968

Lesbian Academics in Canada

2007· article· en· W1500190968 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jeri Dawn Wine

Bibliographic record

VenueResources for feminist research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianSociologyGender studiesCourageQueerPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Reprinted from The Lesbian Issue, RFR/DRF vol. 12, no. 1, March 1983) My interest in writing this paper emerged from my own experience as a recently lesbian in academia. My growing feminist consciousness has been enriched by my thorough woman-identification, and rendered more difficult by the marginalization inherent in being lesbian in a heterosexist world, even in feminist circles. I participated in this lesbian issue of RFR/DRF through an increasing need to make my own personal-political connections, by making public that which heterosexist society keeps silent and invisible. I have also experienced a growing need to learn how other lesbian academics struggle with the problems and experience that excitement of being lesbian in an academic environment. Reading about the courage and commitment of US lesbian academics and the ovarian work in lesbian studies in the States (see my review of Lesbian Studies, this issue) has been both inspirational and terrifying. I needed to know how representative this work is of the experience of lesbian academics in Canada and how similar or disparate my experience might be from that of others. In the process of preparing the paper I talked with six other lesbians who currently are teaching or have taught in Canadian universities. These seven (including myself) women are not necessarily representative of Canadian lesbian academics; they are simply the women to whom I had access and who were willing to talk to me. I knew only one of them prior to the interviews; three others volunteered to be interviewed in response to an ad at the November CRIAW conference in Ottawa; the other two were suggested by mutual friends. We are limited, with a single exception, to academics in Ontario who have some commitment to the feminist movement, although the level, length and nature of our commitment vary considerably. Fully closeted lesbian academics, who are most likely to be the largest proportion of us, are not represented. Our academic appointments have included sessional instructorships, senior tutor positions, and tenured faculty positions. Our disciplines are English literature, journalism, anthropology, law, sociology and psychology, with a BA degree, LLDs and PhDs among us. We are all in our 30s or 40s, have identified ourselves as lesbian for at least five years and have been teaching from 2 to 14 years. Some of us, Suniti Namjoshi, Maureen Fitz-Gerald, Kathleen Lahey and myself, have chosen to be publicly identified in this article; the other women have asked that they not be identified. In talking with these women I was particularly interested in their perceptions of their academic environments, and whether they had experienced reprisals because of their lesbianism. I wanted to kow whether they were in their academic environments and their experiences during their coming out process. Finally, I was interested in whether and how their lesbian identity may have influenced their feminist consciousness, and the extent to which both lesbian identity and feminist consciousness informed their productive work. A variety of other issues emerged during the interviews but due to space limitations I've restricted my discussion to these major areas. Our observations about the nature of our academic environments have some common features. Most of us have sexual orientation clauses in our contracts; cannot be openly sanctioned for being lesbian. Though several women have failed to have contracts renewed or have not been granted tenure or tenure-stream appointments, their lesbianism was never publicly mentioned as a reason. If they think we don't want her here because she's a queer, they can think of other reasons. That's the level on which that kind of thing operates. If people don't want you they can get rid of you. They would never say that was the reason. Only one of the women knew of a specific instance in which her lesbianism was cited as reason for dismissal by her dean, and the dismissal attempt was effectively quashed by a male colleague who took strong exception to this whole line and confronted the dean, told him that he thought it was an unacceptable reaction. …

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResources for feminist researchSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207