Older LGBTQ+ Canadians’ Experiences of Prejudice and Discrimination Over the Life Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Amidst the growing global visibility of older lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and gender and sexually diverse (LGBTQ+) individuals, the predominantly American research has established that they face continued prejudice and discrimination. Yet, few studies outside of the United States have examined their life course experiences, including those related to adverse events. Building on the existing research, the present qualitative study uses a life-course perspective to explore older LGBTQ+ Canadians' experiences of prejudice and discrimination. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We recruited and conducted multiple, in-depth, semistructured qualitative interviews with 30 LGBTQ+ Canadian individuals, aged 65 to 83, about their life course experiences, including if and how they had been treated differently because of their gender identities, sexual orientations, and ages. Interview transcriptions were coded and analyzed using descriptive thematic analysis. RESULTS: All 30 participants reported traumatic and adverse experiences in patterned ways across the life course. Whereas they often faced abuse and harassment in childhood and young adulthood, they frequently reported institutionally situated prejudice and discrimination in midlife. Despite changing laws and social norms, in later life participants were subjected to targeted mistreatment and systemic neglect and exclusion as a result of their gender identities, sexual orientations, and ages. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings from this study corroborate previous research and shed light on the ways that prejudice and discrimination have often permeated the lives of older LGBTQ+ Canadians. The research also points to the continued and urgent need to fight bigotry through education, policy, and progressive legislation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".