Choosing to Stay: Building a Future for Gender-Diverse People in Saskatchewan through Stories of Hope and Belonging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper draws on the first comprehensive study of Two Spirit, trans, nonbinary, and gender-nonconforming (2STNBGN) people in Saskatchewan. Despite challenges, including rising conservatism and targeted political attacks, we temper assumptions that trans and queer people want to leave Saskatchewan for other locations where the 2STNBGN community is assumed to be bigger. Many of our participants described choosing to stay in the province as an intentional way to build community, advocate for support, and cultivate belonging. We further explore a distinctly prairie politic that includes Two Spirit and Indigiqueer projects of belonging to land and community, cross-provincial trans community organizing, and a complicated geography that supersedes binaries between urban and rural. Our research tells us that gender-diverse people on the prairies are enacted through a “grounded relationality,” a context-dependent, binary-resistant expression through place, whether that place is land, city, country, or small-town paint store. Ultimately, our research shows that despite an increasingly chilly political climate toward 2STNBGN people, Saskatchewan still bears witness to trans joy, innovative activism, and an activated trans community that is invested in a future that they are a part of.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".