'My You're a Great Man': A Wâkôhtowin Exploration of the Changing Indigenous Masculinity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When it comes to examining Indigenous boys, men, and masculinities, much of the research remains theoretical in nature, with few scholarly explorations of how diverse, place-specific Indigenous nations engage in processes of recuperating and sustaining the Indigenous values, roles, and responsibilities of boys and men. In this paper, we present research emerging from a five-year “community-first Land centred” project with Ochêkwi-Sîpî (Fisher River Cree Nation), which is located in the territory today known as ‘Canada’. The findings in this paper foreground the stories of eighteen Elders that were gathered through sharing circles and intergenerational interviews. The findings are analyzed using a relational ontology, and more specifically the Cree concept of wâkôhtowin (being related). In so doing, we were able to see how an ethic of relational accountability to self, community, nation, and more-than-human relations was woven through the stories of the Elders, as they envisioned what Cree masculinities could be.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".