Punjabi masculinities and transnational spaces: Performance, choice and othering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article seeks to comprehensively understand student‐migrant men's identities and masculinities in transnational spaces in Canada. Building on existing literature on transnational masculinities, and partly on identity process theory, I focus on upper‐caste Punjabi men who came to Canada as international students. Through in‐depth interviews with 22 men, I explore the significance of landownership back home, caste identity and transnational communication in constituting the hegemonic masculinities in transnational spaces and the ‘othering’ within the Punjabi community faced by young men in Canada. By examining how young men respond to the complexities of source and host situation as well as their hegemonic content, I demonstrate the relational and fluid nature of hegemonic Punjabi masculinities. I conclude that even though the hegemonic ideal for men in transnational spaces remains to be the local rural masculinities based on landownership in Punjab, alternative strategies are put in place when that hegemonic ideal becomes difficult to achieve in transnational spaces or when there is a willing disinclination to achieve it such as in case of men who do not express a desire to return.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".