Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada is in the forefront of lesbian and gay rights in the world. It is one of the few countries that systematically ban discrimination against lesbians and gay men in areas such as housing and employment while, at the same time, extending recognition to same sex couples. Same sex marriage is on the Canadian policy agenda and is fast becoming a legal fact across jurisdictions. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) struggles over the last twenty years have centred on litigation. Drawing on the powerful template of rights discourse, a discourse that is deeply rooted in Canadian society, the LGBT movement has claimed the rights of citizenship on equal terms with heterosexuals. This article argues that the quest for legal rights is only one stage of LGBT struggles and that, as legal recognition and protection is increasingly extended to lesbian and gay citizens and as the drive for legal equality reaches its apex with the legal recognition of same sex marriage, the policy agenda of the lesbian and gay movement will increasingly focus on advancing queer identities and interests within social institutions such as the education system, the health care system and broader fields of social policy. As the lesbian and gay movement moves beyond the drive for legal citizenship, many of these struggles will focus on overcoming the social stigma that still attaches to
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".