Sikhi and Queerness: Summary by SHER Vancouver LGBTQ Friends Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sher Vancouver[1] remains dedicated to supporting queer Sikh voices by amplifying messages of love, acceptance, equality and respect. In this essay, we highlight queer voices and their relationship to their Sikhi. As a part of this piece, personal reflections have been voluntarily submitted by individuals willing to share their thoughts and experiences at the intersection of queerness and Sikh identity. Due to the sensitive nature of the topic, all personal information and identifying details have been redacted to preserve anonymity. While there is a large community that identifies as both Sikh and queer, a large majority of this population did not feel safe or comfortable coming forward to share their perspectives due to fears of retaliation and of being outed. This collection of reflections is intended to prompt readers to look inward and consider their own positionality regarding queer identities and their intersections with the Sikh faith. Ultimately, we hope this essay encourages the Sikh community to re-examine Sikh teachings through the lived experiences of queer Sikhs, fostering a deeper understanding, compassion, and a greater sense of belonging for all. [1] Sher Vancouver LGBTQ Friends Society is a Canadian charity supporting LGBTQ+ South Asians through advocacy, education, and peer support.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".