Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Colonization and the historical mistreatment of Indigenous women points to their gendered disposability, victimization, and criminalization today. During colonization, Indigenous women’s bodies were controlled through policy, such as the Indian Act, and through physical abuse and rape. Colonization impacted Indigenous women by forcing them to the city where poor living conditions led many to rely on the sex trade as a means of survival, causing further victimization. Due to the criminalization of prostitution, many Indigenous women who use this as a means to survive are “Othered” and perceived as disposable. This disposability extends to the courts and criminal justice system where Indigenous women are not afforded dignity or respect as human beings, for example in the case of Cindy Gladue. The lived experiences of criminalized Indigenous women are not considered and instead colonial stereotypes surrounding Indigenous women’s sexuality remain pervasive. The case of Pamela George will be discussed in the context of prostitution and Indigenous bodies as violent spaces, colonial entitlement to Indigenous bodies and the land, and incorrect implementation of the victimization-criminalization continuum in the cases of criminalized Indigenous women. A long-neglected issue that points to the continued gendered disposability of Indigenous women is the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. In order to break down Indigenous women’s gendered disposability, the victimization-criminalization continuum must be properly acknowledged, the state and community must acknowledge their shared responsibility to Indigenous women, and harmful stereotypical narratives about Indigenous criminality and sexuality must be removed from institutional and everyday discourse. Keywords: Indigenous women, disposability, prostitution, colonization, sexual violence, criminal justice system, MMIWG
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".