Sapphic Sanctuaries: Navigating and Creating Lesbian Spaces in Fredericton, New Brunswick, 1969-1995

Rosemarie Forsberg

In 1979, lesbians in Fredericton, New Brunswick, found community not in a dedicated gay bar or a visible neighbourhood, but on the dance floor of the Cosmopolitan Club. On Thursday nights, women quietly gathered with friends, effectively “queering” a predominantly heterosexual venue. In a city without lesbian bars, bookstores, or formal organizations, even a dance floor could become a place of belonging. From 1979 to 1995, lesbians in Fredericton actively built and sustained physical and imagined queer spaces that fostered community, activism, and belonging. Whether through dances, newsletters, phone lines, private homes, or women-only organizing, these spaces reveal how meaningful lesbian community could flourish beyond Canada’s metropolitan centres. In recovering these histories, Fredericton’s lesbian spaces emerge not as exceptions to Canadian queer history, but as evidence that community has always existed.

Queer history in Canada is often centred on the country’s largest urban centres: Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal. Histories of queer activism have long focused on these cities, where visible institutions such as bars, bookstores, political organizations, and later gay villages left a stronger archival footprint. Much of the scholarship has similarly centred the experiences of urban gay men, tracing legal milestones such as decriminalization, police repression, and the rise of liberation movements. However, this focus overlooks the rich and varied experiences of lesbians in places like Fredericton, where queer history did not always take the form of visible institutions. Lesbian histories outside major cities challenge the assumption that queer communities depended on permanent spaces such as gay villages or commercial venues. Instead, many rural and small-city lesbians built networks through temporary gatherings, personal relationships, and community-based organizing.

As the provincial capital and home to two universities, Fredericton occupies a unique position within New Brunswick’s largely rural landscape. For many lesbians living in smaller towns, it became the nearest place to find others like themselves. Women travelled hours by car to attend dances, softball tournaments, and other events in the city, while local publications and phone networks helped sustain connections across long distances.

One of the clearest ways that lesbians created space in Fredericton was through community organizations. The founding of Fredericton Lesbians and Gays (FLAG) in 1979 gave lesbians access to meetings, dances, discussion groups, and a volunteer phone line. Even without a permanent headquarters, FLAG transformed temporary spaces such as university classrooms, church gymnasiums, and rented halls into meaningful queer spaces. However, the 1980s brought a notable decline in lesbian participation in mixed queer organizations like FLAG, shaped by broader tensions including lesbian separatist politics and ongoing experiences of misogyny and marginalization within male-dominated queer spaces. Across Canada, many lesbians responded to these tensions by creating women-only spaces that prioritized lesbian voices outside of male-dominated gay spaces. In Fredericton, this shift contributed to the founding of WOMYN in 1991, a lesbian-focused group that hosted and organized a variety of social activities, including dances, potlucks, barbecues, and softball games. By organizing regular social events in dedicated spaces, WOMYN created consistent opportunities for lesbians to build relationships and foster a sense of belonging.

Nightlife was another important way that lesbians in Fredericton carved out space, even without a dedicated lesbian bar. In the 1970s, lesbians gathered at the Cosmopolitan Club, a straight-owned venue on King Street that became a key nightlife spot for both gay men and lesbians, especially on Thursday nights. Because it was still risky for lesbians to dance openly with other women, gay men and lesbians often danced together in mixed pairs to appear as a heterosexual couple. By the 1980s and 1990s, this nightlife expanded through FLAG’s mixed dances and later WOMYN’s women-only dances, which offered safer and more intentional spaces for the lesbian community, visibility, and belonging.

An advertisement for Fredericton Lesbians and Gays (FLAG) from the first edition of Flag Mag, 1980. (Flag Mag No. 1, September 1980: 2)

Continue reading

Teaching Against AI: Notes from the Field

      4 Comments on Teaching Against AI: Notes from the Field

Edward Dunsworth

While a small but vocal minority of historians have embraced the use of generative artificial intelligence in their research and teaching,[1] many of us find ourselves trying to hold the pedagogical line against what we perceive as serious threats to students’ ability to learn, reason, and express themselves intelligently.[2]

In this post, I share my attempts to “teach against AI” in an undergraduate course taught at McGill University in fall 2025. HIST 299, The Historian’s Craft, is an introductory theory-and-method class recently made a requirement for history majors. My objectives were for students to consider some of the major questions in the philosophy of history, learn about important changes over time in historiography, learn about some of the main ways that people “do” history, and then to try their hand at doing it themselves, via research and writing.

The author’s paper-strewn desk

As I’ve made clear in past pieces, I don’t believe that generative AI has anything useful to offer students towards the attainment of any of these goals. To the contrary, I think it poses a significant danger to students’ ability to think independently and develop as thinkers, writers, and human beings. Emerging research supports my concerns.

I thus adopted a number of strategies in this course to encourage students to do things the “old school” way, with the aim of fostering the learning and skill development at the core of our mission as educators in humanities and social sciences. In what follows I outline what I did, what I didn’t do, and what students thought about it all.

Continue reading

Active History – We’re Back!

      1 Comment on Active History – We’re Back!

“Algonquin Park,” October 4, 1995, photo by Dick Loek, published by the Toronto Star (Toronto Star Archives, Toronto Public Library).

ActiveHistory.ca is back from our summer hiatus! This week we’ll be releasing new posts, and we’re excited to share some new changes with all our contributors, guest writers, guest editors, and readers that we’ll be rolling out later this year. Keep an eye out!

Sincerely,
The Active History Editorial Collective

Repost: Rural Museums Matter: The Ross-Thomson House & Store

By Erin Isaac and Cady Berardi

The thoughts and sentiments shared in this essay are our own and do not represent the Nova Scotia Museum or Shelburne Historical Society.

As part of the significant cuts set out in the 2026-2027 Nova Scotia provincial budget, the Department of Communities, Culture, Tourism and Heritage announced last week that they needed “to focus [their] efforts where they will make the most difference.” Those efforts will no longer extend to the 12 rural museums they suddenly, and without warning, decided to permanently shutter. Shelburne’s Ross-Thomson House & Store was among the casualties. 

In their statement, the department indicated that they considered several factors when deciding which museums to close, but noted especially that these sites had low visitor attendance. This measure does not acknowledge the value of these heritage spaces to their communities or the important histories they preserve.

Continue reading

Repost: The power of oral history in piecing together archival fragments documenting 2SLGBTQ+ community histories

Meredith J. Batt

P918-1067 Mullins Photography Ltd. fonds, PANB, Fredericton, N.B., October 1998. 

I have made an error.

These are not words that come easily to a historian, when evidence is the backbone of our work. However, as Tim Lacy notes in his Society for U.S. Intellectual History blog post On the Failures of Historians, “There is no question that historians in their role as content experts experience failure.  All humans are imperfect, and all historians are human, hence imperfect historians are not always on target.” It is how we correct the misinformation that matters; one way is by using tools, additional records and memories to add context to archival records where incorrect assumptions have been made.  This article thus follows my journey in correcting my own error in historical research using oral history to piece together archival fragments. 

Continue reading

Repost: “Entre Amis in an Era of Polarization”

By Stephanie Bangarth and Sara Beth Keough

In March 2026, a Canadian historian and an American Geographer met in Cambridge, ON to begin a collaborative project, literally “between friends,” inspired by Canada’s 1976 bicentennial gift to the United States, the coffee table book Between Friends/Entre Amis.[i] The year 2026 marks the 50th anniversary of this gift. And we are those two scholars.  Looking at this book together, as friends and scholars from opposite sides of the border, inspired questions about the current relationship between Canada and the United States. What did this book mean to the two countries at the time of its publication? What does this book mean 50 years later? How has the polarization of the Canada-U.S. relationship changed the meaning of this gift?  This essay is our reflection on the historical context of the book and some possible answers to these questions.

First edition publication of the book Between Friends/Entre Amis. Photo by authors.

Between Friends/Entre Amis was Canada’s official gift to the United States on the occasion of its bicentennial in 1976. Twenty-six Canadian photographers were commissioned by Lorraine Monk of the Still Photography Division of the National Film Board of Canada, and some 220 photographs were ultimately included in the volume. Designed to celebrate “the longest undefended international border in the world,” photographers were tasked with capturing images within 30 miles of the Canada-U.S. border, beginning in the Arctic, down the Alaska panhandle and across the Rockies, prairies, Great Lakes, Quebec, and the Maritimes. McClelland & Stewart’s press run was the most ambitious Canadian publishing project to that time. Indeed, some 200,000 copies were printed, and the book received outstanding praise and criticism in the press on both sides of the border. A special Presentation Edition was extended for American dignitaries. Pierre Trudeau and Lorraine Monk personally gave President Ford his copy in a Washington ceremony. The entire project cost about $1 million (in 1976).

Continue reading

Repost: Trump needs a history lesson. Maybe we all do

By Robert Englebert

The tariff war has begun.

Since coming into office only weeks ago, Donald Trump’s on-and-off again threat of taking a sledgehammer to free trade has kept Canadians on edge.  

Canadians are angry and frustrated, especially at Trump’s continued assertion that our country is not viable and that we should become the 51st state.

I am not all that convinced that Trump’s end goal is to annex Canada, but if for some reason that is the objective, he need only look to Canada’s long history to understand how unlikely he is to succeed.

Reproduced in A Caricature History of Canada, Volume I, 23 Sept 1869 (wikimedia commons)

Our countries seem alike, but are not the same. We have had many opportunities to join our neighbours to the south and have repeatedly decided to chart a different path, each step shaping distinctive Canadian political structures and traditions.

Continue reading

Active History Summer Hiatus

      No Comments on Active History Summer Hiatus

It Won’t Be Long Now! A Scene at the Bathing Beach at Port Dalhousie, Ontario,” May 2, 1930, photo by Canadian National Railways, published by the Toronto Star (Toronto Star Archives, Toronto Public Library).

ActiveHistory.ca is on a hiatus for our annual summer break, with a return to daily posts in mid-august.

Thank you to all our contributors, guest writers, guest editors, and readers for making 2026 a very successful year. In the meantime, we will be periodically reposting some excellent posts. 

Wishing you all a great summer we look forward to continuing our work soon!

The Archive is Not a Toy: The Hidden Problems of a ‘Vintage’ AI

Jacob Polay, Chloë Farr, and Jessica Jack

Black and white photo of a crowd of people, some in military uniforms, throwing books into a huge bonfire.
Nazi Germany 1933-05 Aktion wider den undeutschen Geist Public burning of unwanted books and publications deemed dissenting SA Sturmabteilung Studetns etc retouched photo Narodowe Archiwum Cyfrowe. May 10, 1933. Unidentified (unknown, uncredited or anonymous) photographer, Keystone View Company Berlin SW 68 Zimmerstrasse 29. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

Generations of social historians have scoured archives and invented new ways of doing history through their collaboration with other fields. A new “vintage AI” model, talkie, is an example of what happens when knowledge extraction replaces collaboration.

Parsing the various communications around the model, the team behind talkie has framed their new LLM in two ways. In their blog post introducing this new model, and in an interview with the podcast Hard Fork, the team behind this project describe its predictive potential. They aim to test whether language models can predict events beyond the period of the training data, and do so by training it with pre-1931 documents. The team presupposes that if this “vintage” model can predict its future, then modern models trained on the current web can predict our future.

talkie chatbot interface, however, does not engage with the model as a predictive tool. There is no proof of its efficacy. In our testing, their local model is not shipped with any predictive capabilities, nor do they provide sufficient documentation to achieve any prediction. Instead, it acts more like a toy to interact with a particular version of history. Their tagline advertises the model as “an LM from 1930,” as if the user is talking with an entity from the past. The framing between prediction and history disguises a tool whose use is unclear and whose underpinnings are flawed.

These flaws begin with the data on which talkie was trained. Its training corpus was a subset of the published English-language record before 1930. Like most western archives, this is a corpus likely dominated by white, male, and elite writers. Other voices are outweighed in the records and further filtered by digitization. The result is a model that speaks confidently for the past in the voice of its narrowest slice.

Continue reading

In Defence of Busywork

      2 Comments on In Defence of Busywork

Nastasha Sartore

Earlier this year, over forty people logged in to Zoom to attend a CHA webinar titled “Generative AI and the Practice of History.” Introduced as a “show and tell” for AI tools and strategies, the webinar included a panel of three expert historians who each presented on a distinct topic related to agentic AI, the tech that’s been dominating headlines since the release of Chat GPT to the general public in November 2022.

While I was hoping for a lively conversation about AI and creative thinking, writing, labour, and capitalism, much of the discussion centred around “best practices,” revealing what I felt was a relatively uncritical acceptance of these dynamic platforms. During the Q&A, most discussants sought answers on how to apply AI tech “responsibly” in their pedagogical and scholarly work. I, on the other hand, was left wondering about a much more essential, epistemic question, one that gets to the root of our role as scholars, teachers, and citizens of the world: how will the process of cognitive “offloading” shape, and potentially harm, the creative potential of our scholarship? Will there be any space left in our praxis for curiosity? Wonder? Possibility?

I suddenly felt I had missed something in recent months. How and when had we reached the consensus that offloading and outsourcing our more arduous tasks was decidedly “good,” for history as practice, for the university, and for our engagement with the world more broadly?

Woman with wax tablets and stylus, 55 -79 AD, public domain

Continue reading