MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162025709 · doi:10.82308/26773

Queering Islam? QTMuslims in Toronto, Canada

2021· dissertation· en· W7162025709 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Golshan Golriz Fard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerMainstreamScholarshipLesbianIdentity (music)Religious identityEthnographyQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research on Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer (LGBTQ) and religious identity has generally focused on psychological conflict and reconciliation. Social scientific studies have examined why queer and trans religious individuals experience identity conflict and how they reconcile it. In both qualitative and quantitative analyses, religion has been identified as the major source of identity conflict, while religious individualism and membership in Queer and Trans Religious Organizations (QTROs) have been shown to foster identity reconciliation. Although these findings have been important, they have relied on the assumption that faith-based and LGBTQ identities are fundamentally irreconcilable. Accordingly, existing scholarship has neglected to account for the non-religious factors impacting queer and trans religious individuals and has failed to consider their processes of group engagement. This dissertation therefore shifts the analysis away from individual/psychological conflict and examines the experiences of Queer and Trans Muslims (QTMuslims) in mainstream Muslim and queer organizations. The research draws on a two-year ethnography and a total of seventy interviews with leaders of Queer and Trans Muslim Organizations (QTMOs), mainstream Muslim organizations, mainstream queer organizations, and a counter-to-mainstream queer organization in Toronto, Canada. I also rely on participant observation, content analysis, and archival research. The dissertation includes three standalone chapters, which collectively analyze QTMuslims’ social positions and institutional relationships. In Chapter 1, I show that religion does not necessarily prevent LGBTQ acceptance, although QTMuslims still encounter barriers in religious organizations. In speaking to leaders of mainstream Muslim organizations from various sects (e.g. Sunni, Shia, Isma’ili, and Sufi), I broaden the criteria through which to define measures of both religion and LGBTQ acceptance: I account for individuals’ complex and multifaceted relationships with Islam and consider both attitudes and actions as forms of LGBTQ acceptance. Resultingly, I find a range of acceptance levels that are rooted in both religious and non-religious factors.Chapter 2 challenges the assumption that QTMuslims have an unproblematic or non-existent relationship to mainstream queer organizations. My archival and interview data show that the diversity mandates of Toronto’s mainstream queer organizations are inadequate for including QTMuslims. Such diversity initiatives are based on an inclusion model that consolidates all minority LGBTQ identities under a master sexual identity. The premise of queer universality in this model perpetuates the assumption that queerness and Islam are irreconcilable and fails to account for the intersectional identities of QTMuslims. Additionally, the positive appearance of diversity initiatives conceals the structural biases embedded in mainstream queer organizations. In Chapter 3, I examine the ways that QTMuslims’ respond to exclusion from mainstream Muslim and queer organizations. I find that rather than seeking mainstream integration, they form their own sectarian QTMOs. In this sense, QTMOs can be analyzed as alternative-to-mainstream “safe spaces,” in which collective oppositional identities are cultivated. By challenging mainstream sexism, homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, and racism, QTMOs cultivate the intersectional character of their members’ identities.Overall, the dissertation shows that QTMuslims’ experiences reflect more than a psychological conflict between their religious and sexual/gender identities. Rather, my research looks at the ways that QTMuslims, as a social group, can encounter and resist institutional barriers in their daily lives. In conclusion, I reframe QTMuslim group engagement within the context of social movements

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→