Unpacking the Islamophobic & queerphobic logics of the sexuality education classroom: what might queer joy praxis offer?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How might invoking queer joy praxis address antiqueer, Islamophobic, and settler colonial carceral logics in sexuality education classrooms? In this paper, we delve into the rise of queerphobic and transphobic policies and rhetoric, alongside growing homonationalist and Islamophobic discourses in New Brunswick, Canada. Using data emerging from five participatory visual workshops with 67 sexuality education teachers collected from 2022-2024, we explore how teachers seemed challenged to reconcile their sexuality education practice with the religious, cultural, and queer diversities that exist in their classrooms. Reflecting on these findings, we invoke the notion of queer joy praxis to confront the Islamophobic logics that emerged across the data. We seek to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of how religious, cultural, and queer diversities operate in and around sexuality education classrooms, considering how they might be reframed into spaces of joyful queer futures, accessible to all students, in all their multitudes.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".