To whom can Canada be home? : an intersectional analysis of the perceived challenges in accessing housing for women asylum seekers in Montreal, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the complex interplay between various identity factors such as gender, parenthood, and citizenship status, collectively influencing housing accessibility for asylum-seeking women in Montreal, Canada. By focusing on their understudied experiences, it addresses two key questions: (1) What are the perceived challenges faced by asylum-seeking women in accessing housing in Montreal? (2) How do intersecting social categories such as gender, race, socioeconomic class, immigration status, and parenthood collectively influence the housing accessibility of asylum-seeking women in Canada? This research is grounded in intersectionality theory, which offers a nuanced understanding of the intricate dynamics involved. Qualitative methodology is employed to amplify the voices of asylum-seeking women through semi-structured interviews, providing a platform for both structured questions and narrative storytelling. Thematic analysis and the matrix of domination inform data analysis. The main findings reveal logistical, economic, and social and cultural barriers faced by asylum-seeking women in accessing housing. These challenges necessitate the implementation of targeted policy interventions that address the structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal domains of power. Specifically, asylum-seeking women encounter difficulties in accessing childcare or schools, navigating a new environment, delays in the immigration process, overcrowding in shelters, absence of a credit record, high rental prices, discrimination by landlords, inadequate government support, financial limitations, emotional burdens, social isolation, gender-based insecurity, discrimination, language barriers, and trust issues. These challenges intersect with gender, race, socioeconomic class, immigration status and parenthood, underscoring the necessity for tailored interventions to address the distinctive housing needs of asylum-seeking women and inform policy discussions for more equitable housing policies. This research is significant in that it has the potential to illuminate the overlooked narratives of asylum-seeking women, thereby fostering a more inclusive discourse on housing accessibility and contributing to a more responsive housing policy landscape.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".