“I’m asking, queer 2 queer: are we family?”: Reflections on Canada’s First National Queer Theatre and Performance Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The editors of Canadian Theatre Review invited bisexual, genderqueer playwright, performer, and curator Katie Sly to offer their reflections on participating in Q2Q, Canada’s first national symposium on queer theatre and performance. In their article, “I’m asking, queer 2 queer: are we family?” Katie examines the charged and contentious energy of the conference, and offers that within queer performance circles, there is not sufficient inter-generational understanding, and there is not enough of a universally aligned perspective on how racism, ableism, and transphobia are enacted in queer spaces, for queer theatre professionals across this country to call each other kin. Rather than seeing this as a failing of the queer performance community or Q2Q, however, Katie posits that contentions that arose at Q2Q are a direct indication of why this national symposium was necessary, and that the repetition of Q2Q is an essential component in building a more compassionate, empathetic, and aware queer performance community, in which we can honour our personal biographies of struggle and oppression surrounding being queer, while also realizing that our biographies do not divorce us from systemic advantages based on race, being cisgender, and other visible and invisible identities.
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 | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".