The Sexual Subjectivity of Youth with Physical Disabilities: An Arts-Based Study in Toronto, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundYouth with physical disabilities are often perceived as sexually vulnerable, incapable, or abnormal and sexuality information and support are therefore restricted. As a result, youth with physical disabilities may struggle to develop and assert their sexual subjectivity. To better understand the sexual subjectivity of youth with physical disabilities, we conducted a critical qualitative arts-based study. MethodsThe arts-based method of body map storytelling was used. Youth with physical disabilities (13 – 21 years) in Toronto, Canada engaged in virtual interviews while creating a map of their bodies. A critical visual methodology guided the interpretation and integration of the visual and verbal data, alongside a reflexive thematic analysis of the verbal data. ResultsEleven youth with physical disabilities participated, who were diverse across disability, race, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Youth with physical disabilities were rarely able to access disability-specific sexuality information and therefore had to form their sexual subjectivity alone. Some participants found support in countercultural spaces (e.g., 2SLGBTQIA+ communities), which were typically online. Their sexuality was validated in these spaces because differences were embraced rather than stigmatized and excluded. Youth with physical disabilities often experienced constant pain, so they had to find ways to integrate it into their sexual subjectivity. For some participants, markers of their pain (e.g., scars) became markers of their strength and sexiness. In contrast, pleasure was framed as their responsibility to others and not considered for themselves. ConclusionThe sexual subjectivity of youth with physical disabilities was restricted by society, where they were seen as vulnerable and therefore, not as sexual beings. Youth in our study had to navigate this desexualization and find creative ways to form their sexual subjectivity. To support the sexuality of youth with physical disabilities, their invisibility at the social structural level must be addressed and they must be integrated into the social imaginary as valuable and desirable sexual beings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».