Finding a Voice: Place & Queer Student Health at the University of Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within recent years, there has been a growth of interest in both queer health and geographies of sexualities. However, the majority of this research has focused on both queer health and use of space as they related to sexual activity, sex-related health risks, and desire, while overlooking those aspects of both queer identity and health that are not directly tied to sexual activity. This study addresses these gaps within the literature by studying queer health using the lens of place. The objective of this study is to understand how self-identified queer students at the University of Saskatchewan negotiated space and in particular, safe spaces, in their daily lives, and how this negotiation affected their health and well-being. This research was conceptually guided by ideas within feminist thought and queer theory. The study took place in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan and included a group of five University of Saskatchewan undergraduate and certificate students who self-identified as queer. Participants were recruited through advertisements posted both online and throughout the campus. Data were collected through an action research approach with methods that included individual interviews, group meetings, and Photovoice. Results of the study include a list of elements that participants used to label safe spaces and lists of common safe spaces and safe areas on the University of Saskatchewan campus and throughout Saskatoon. Participants in this study emphasized the relationship between the people who made regular use of a space, its overall "feel," and their familiarity with the space with its level of safety, while also making it clear that queer was not always synonymous with safe. These findings yield insight into the process that individuals use to mentally label space and the subsequent ways in which this labelling influences use of space and, on a broader level, reflects individual and group identity. This raises some important questions about current definitions and ideas regarding safe spaces and provides a foundation for future research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.091 | 0.009 |
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".