Vulnerability to HIV among regular male partners and the social coding of intimacy in modern societies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies suggest that regular male partners who engage in unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) are currently at risk of HIV infection. In this paper, we try to offer a single and coherent theoretical framework to understand this profile of HIV infection. Data on transformations of intimacy in recent times, UAI and condom use between regular male partners and their correlates are reviewed. Firstly, we describe the social and historical context of modern intimate relationships. The differentiation of intimate relationships and their newfound autonomy from traditional social forces are explored to determine how they may contribute to the destabilization of intimate trajectories. Secondly, we theorize UAI as an attempt to stabilize intimate relationships and a strategy to reaffirm mutual trust, desire and intimacy between regular male partners. The impacts of such an approach to social vulnerability and HIV prevention are also discussed. Résumé Des études récentes suggèrent que les relations anales non protégées entre partenaires masculins réguliers, et non plus uniquement celles entre partenaires occasionnels, constituent un facteur de risque de séroconversion au VIH. Dans cet article, nous proposons une lecture sociologique de la vulnérabilité sociale au VIH qui met l'accent sur la quéte d'intimité entre les partenaires réguliers comme facteur de vulnérabilité. En résumé, nous proposons que le processus de différenciation et d'autonomisation des relations intimes à l'égard des déterminants sociaux traditionnels notamment liés à la stratification a contribué à rendre instables les trajectoires intimes, qui deviennent plus difficiles à initier et à faire durer. Nous théorisons la prise de risques sexuels comme une tentative de stabilisation de la relation intime et une réitération de la confiance mutuelle. Les impacts d'une telle approche de la vulnérabilité sociale au pour la prévention sont discutés. Resumen Según los recientes estudios, los hombres que tienen relaciones anales sin protección, no solo con compañeros ocasionales sino también con parejas sexuales estables, corren el riesgo de infectarse con el virus de inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH). En este artículo, proponemos una lectura sociológica de la vulnerabilidad social frente al VIH, el cual hace un énfasis sobre la intimidad entre parejas estables como factor de riesgo. Asimismo, analizaremos las diferencias entre las relaciones íntimas y su nueva autonomía lejos de las fuerzas sociales tradicionales, a fin de determinar como podrían éstas contribuir a desestabilizar las trayectorias de la pareja con respecto a la intimidad. De otra parte, suponemos que el no uso del preservativo en las relaciones anales es empleado como una manera de afianzar las relaciones de pareja, y al mismo tiempo, este tipo de estrategia es utilizado para reafirmar la fidelidad mutua entre homosexuales con relaciones estables. Las repercusiones de este planteamiento, en cuanto a la vulnerabilidad social y la prevención del VIH, serán discutidas a lo largo del artículo.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".