Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditional indigenous societies were gendered in terms of roles and responsibilities for men and women. This was determined according to physical capacity and what males and females could contribute toward the survival of people in these land‐based cultures. Men typically engaged in “protecting and providing” while women were responsible for “creating and nurturing.” Within these roles there was flexibility according to capacity, need, and the gendered identity of the individual. Traditional indigenous societies valued gender balance, knowing that all gendered contributions were significant to the well‐being of the collective. Spirituality plays a significant role in traditional and indigenous knowledge of gender, where masculine and feminine are recognized in the natural world as expressions of spirit (e.g., Mother Earth, Father Sky). Individuals could carry varying degrees of masculine and feminine spirit. Two‐spirit or queer individuals were understood to carry a combination of the masculine and feminine, and this allowed for gender variance within traditional indigenous societies. Traditional systems involving gender balance, gender variance, and shame‐free sexuality came under attack through colonialism. Current movements in indigenous feminism, indigenous masculinities studies, and queer indigenous theory document the introduction of heteropatriarchy and provide a vision for a healthier future through reclaiming indigenous and traditional knowledge.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.002 |
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".