What is Two-Spirit: Centring Knowledge about Two-Spirit Gender and Sexuality in Sexuality Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term Two-Spirit (2S) reflects the resurgence by Two-Spirit and Indigenous people to share knowledge about gender identity and sexuality through cultural or linguistic-specific perspectives anchored in their worldviews. The term has consolidated within the queer community on Turtle Island since it was introduced in 1990 at an international gathering. The use of Two-Spirit is also increasing in the general population, especially in the queer community and public institutions. Recently, the federal government of Canada began to use the 2S at the front end of the acronym 2SLGBTQQIA+ to acknowledge Two-Spirit's historical experience and space in Canada. In Indigenous communities, the term “Two-Spirit” may be used in the absence of words, terms, or phrases that would have been impacted by colonialism and the onslaught of heteronormative and patriarchal values inflicted onto Indigenous cultures that eroded Two-Spirit language, ceremonies, and teachings since the early colonial period. Each Nation, reserve, tribal affiliation, territory, settlement, and urban Indigenous community is unique. Nevertheless, Two-Spirit people from various Nations continue to share knowledge about Being and Living as Two-Spirit people traditionally and now. Being and Living as Two-Spirit people derives from ancestral knowledge and contemporary perspectives of gender identity and sexuality. The paper highlights the importance of including Two-Spirit (2S) knowledge in sexuality education, which has been categorized mainly under Eurocentric perspectives. Centring Two-Spirit gender identity and sexuality is a deliberate repositioning of Indigenous knowledge front and centre in sexuality education, which supports the process of understanding what is Being and Living as Two-Spirit in a L’nuwey worldview in Atlantic Canada.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".