YOUNG PEOPLE’S PERCEPTIONS OF SEX AND RELATIONSHIPS IN NORTHERN NAMIBIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines conceptions of gender identity and gender relations among youth in rural northern Namibia to see whether or not real life practices are meeting the requirements of legislationthat supports gender equality including the right to work in all spheres for equal pay and benefits, discouragement ofgender-based violence and marginalization, and equality with regard to property inheritance. More specifically, we describe the attitudes and behaviour regarding sex and male/female relationships among these youth. Qualitative research methods based on focus group discussions (FGD) were the core of the data collection techniques in this exploratory study. Our findingsindicate that male respondents feel that males are superior to females. Both 15- to 19-year old and 20- to 24-year-old boys confirmed this. Girls affirm this finding but feelings of inferiority were more marked among girls aged 15 to 19 than among 20 to 24 year olds. All these groups regard sexual intercourse as normal, contributing to a sense of powerlessness when girls are in the presence of boys. Males initiate sexual behaviour (as it is culturally unacceptable for females to do so) and seem to have many more partners than girls. The gap between existing laws and what is culturally desirable (in sex practices) seems real and must be addressed in extended sex education forums whose curriculum challenges long held cultural beliefs aboutmasculinity and femininity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".