“Yes, I Do but Not with You”: Qualitative Analyses of Sexual/romantic Overture-Related Aggression in Bars and Clubs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assaultive and aggressive behaviors related to sexual overtures are common in commercial drinking establishments (bars, pubs and clubs). In this paper, we examined the thematic content of 251 incidents of verbal and physical aggression related to sexual/romantic overtures documented by researcher-observers in a study of Toronto bar and clubs. Aggression was examined as it emerged in the following stages of the social interaction process: (a) sexual/romantic overtures that began aggressively; (b) initiators of sexual/romantic overtures who became aggressive later in the social interaction process; (c) aggression by targets of overtures; and (d) aggression by third parties. From these thematic analyses, we identify the distinctions between predatory and genuine overtures and explore the potential role of the effects of alcohol.In these social overtures, aggression occurred as part of the initial overture, during the interaction following the overture (i.e., aggression by the person who made the initial overture, by the target or third parties) and in response to rejection by the target. Targets of overtures responded aggressively to perceived inappropriate overtures; third parties played important aggressive and nonaggressive roles; and alcohol intoxication was identified as contributing to aggression in a number of ways. The theoretical significance and practical implications for prevention of the findings are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it