The politics of maintaining aboriginal feminism and aboriginal women's roles of sacred responsibility to the land
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal communities continue to struggle against the cultural impositions of a mainstream society that refuses to recognize Aboriginal traditions and worldviews. Such are these mainstream conventions that interpretations of Aboriginal life are only considered valid when they are interpreted by a culture that lacks understanding of Aboriginal gender roles and how they impact community politics and power of women in Aboriginal communities. In establishing this point, I explain the Cree ways of Kiskeneghdamon (seeking knowledge), ways that run counter to western approaches and have, largely, yet to be recognized by western academia. Through the data collected, which reflects the lived experiences and realities of Aboriginal Cree and Zapotec women, I show the holistic cultural truths of Aboriginal gender complementarity in our egalitarian societies. The mutually advantageous relationships between our ways of education, our societal structures, and our values placed on men's and women's roles and how they relate to decision-making both in the home and in the community, are shown as both integral and essential to our survival as nations. As an Inninew Esquew, a Mushkegowuk, a Swampy Cree woman within mainstream Canadian society, I offer an understanding of our Cree philosophy regarding education, politics, women's roles specifically, and how our interpretations differ from mainstream theories espoused by western academics. In this study, which establishes the traditional egalitarian nature of the Aboriginal Cree society of Attawapiskat, juxtaposed with that of the Aboriginal/Indigenous Zapotec community of Juchitan in southern Mexico, I show how ignorance of our traditions, and exclusion and lack of understanding of women's roles threaten our (Cree) existence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".