"The Sex They Really Need:" Medicalization and Popular Interpretations of Homosexuality in Postwar Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the fiftieth anniversary of the Stonewall Riots having just past, it is astounding to see the leaps and bounds made by queer historians towards developing an understanding of homophobia in the American postwar period which led up to the riots. While the publicised, state-sanctioned homophobic purges of men and women from public service has been well documented in American history, the equivalent persecution of gay men and lesbians in Canada has gone largely unexamined. Much like other oppressive acts enacted by the Canadian government, the purging of those suspected of homosexuality has been left out of Canada's collective national history. That organisations such as the RCMP and CSIS act as arbiters of archival documentation detailing the means of constructing and detecting the homosexual other only complicates matters further. As such, researchers can be better served through the examination of auxiliary texts, or interviews with those affected by the purges. This paper opts for the former, utilising postwar medical periodicals, popular media publications, and audio recordings of postwar symposiums to unravel the proposed medical basis for state homophobia and demonstrate how scholarly research was appropriated by the press. Through utilising a queer reading of these texts and employing contemporary queer theory, it is revealed that gender anxiety was at the root of the purges and that constructions of homosexual men and women as subversive was the result of self-reinforcing cycles of information misinterpretation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.054 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".