Silencing of Voice: An Act of Structural Violence Urban Aboriginal Women Speak Out About Their Experiences with Health Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reports some of the preliminary findings of an ongoing participatory research study exploring the provision of health and social services for urban Aboriginal communities in the Okanagan Valley. In particular, the article examines how colonial structures and systems have worked to silence Aboriginal women’s voices and how this has affected the ways in which urban Aboriginal women seek out health services. The article addresses these issues through the voices of the Aboriginal women in the study. The women’s stories reveal the many assumptions and inequities that contribute to their marginalization. They describe how their voices are often silenced when they access health services and how this can cause them to either delay seeking needed health advice or accept the status quo. The women’s stories are used to stress the importance and power of voice. This is most evident in their experiences accessing the health services offered through community-based Friendship Centres, where many felt they had more control over the care they received. In the context of this article, the impacts of colonization and the silencing of women’s voices are viewed as acts of structural violence. The women’s stories provide crucial insights into how health care provision can be changed to help prevent these acts of violence, thus leading the way to improved health for all urban Aboriginal populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".