Geopolitics and romance: how South Asian Muslim Canadians perceive and experience race and religion in mixed partnerships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on 80 interviews of South Asian Muslim Canadians from 2021 to 2022, I show how many Muslims in the West perceive an out-group partner’s views on geopolitical contentions, like Israel/Palestine and Ukraine/Russia, to assess the compatibility of an interracial/interfaith relationship. My participants perceived a discrepancy in the West’s response to the plights of Ukrainians and Palestinians, one that represented to them a hierarchical world where Muslims, as a racialized religious group, occupy a less-than-equal status than whites and non-Muslims. Many believed that if their out-group partner shared similar geopolitical opinions as them, that partner would understand the participants’ experiences as a minority and that values about marriage and family will also coincide. Geopolitics does not seemingly matter within the same ethnicity and religion. Overall, I show how the racialization of Muslims, Islam’s structure as a global religion, and a West-centric world-order penetrate even the intimate spheres of Muslim immigrants’ lives.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".