Racialized Women’s Experiences of Sexual Violence and Harassment in Higher Education: Challenging the Myth of Canadian Multiculturalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through an intersectional theoretical framework, this paper discusses the findings of a qualitative study focusing on racialized women’s experiences of sexual violence and harassment in Canadian higher education. Specifically, this paper considers how the intersections of gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and socioeconomic status inform why racialized women are targets of sexual violence and harassment on campus. Moreover, it seeks to demonstrate how violence is perpetuated against racialized women by institutional and structural forces when they choose whether to disclose. Their experiences of disclosure or remaining silent are both telling of the institutional and structural forms of violence that racialized women experience. The author concludes by arguing that Canada’s emphasis on liberal discourses such as multiculturalism, which universities echo, blurs structural inequities which perpetuate racism and sexism, including classism and homophobia, and works to the disadvantage of racialized women in the context of sexual violence and harassment. This has implications for creating inclusive and equitable campuses, and tackling sexual violence and harassment in higher education.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".