Queering generativity and futurity: LGBTQ2IA+ stories of resistance, resurgence, and resilience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A preoccupation with heteronormative metrics of success in aging leaves many studies of “LGBT aging” focused on the needs, failings, and vulnerabilities of older LGBTQ2IA+ people (i.e. lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, two-spirit, intersex, asexual, and people of other nonnormative sexual and gender expressions). As a result, LGBTQ2IA+ olders are frequently depicted as isolated, re-closeted, or simply nonexistent. Heeding calls to intervene into such bleak and pathologizing portrayals of queer/ trans aging (e.g. Ramirez-Valles 2016; Sandberg & Marshall 2017), this article explores diverse subjectivities, nonnormative aging experiences, and their potential intergenerational implications. It draws on stories of queerness, gender, aging, futurity, and social change from 13 LGBTQ2IA+ people ranging in age from 23 to 74, recorded in an intergenerational research-generation workshop held in Nogojiwanong (Peterborough, Canada) in 2018. This article argues that queer and trans stories are crucial to confronting the erasure of LGBTQ2IA+ aging, aiming to extend ongoing efforts within aging studies to queer concepts of successful aging, aging futures, generativity, and intergenerationality. Ultimately, this article aims to complicate constricted understandings of queer/trans aging, instead of depicting LGBTQ2IA+ people aging with connection, pride, learning, and purpose, as well as with struggle and vulnerability.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".