Legal Violence and the Gendered Necropolitics of Coloniality: Feminicide, Socioeconomic Marginalization, and Housing Rights Violations against Indigenous Women in Guatemala and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues that feminicidal and sexual gender-based violence faced by Indigenous women in Guatemala and Canada is a cause and consequence of these states’ failure to effectively guarantee Indigenous women's intersecting socio-economic rights, namely their right to adequate housing. Exposing the historically-rooted, economic and political interests and investments of the two countries, this paper argues that Indigenous women's rights have been co-opted by legal violence in both contexts. Revealing the complicity of settler democratic states and the international human rights regime in sustaining these rights violations, this paper evidences Indigenous women's socio-economic marginalization, inadequate housing, and consequential feminicidal violence as the product of the gendered necropolitics of coloniality. Interrogating why and how these colonial genocidal structures sustain the subjugation of Indigenous women's bodies, this paper exposes how colonial genocidal structures have rendered Indigenous women illegible for protection under international human rights law. Highlighting a range of performative 1 attempts undertaken by the Guatemala and Canada to address the grave rights violations facing Indigenous women, this paper provides a feminist, decolonial framework that evidences why and how Indigenous women's experiences of socioeconomic marginalization, inadequate and unsafe housing, and the alarming rates of feminicidal and sexual gender-based violence continue to persist unabated.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.018 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".