The Influence of Political Jurisdiction, Age, and Sex on Handholding in Public by Same-Sex Couples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three hundred-forty lesbians and 62 gay males, largely from North America and in partnered relationships, completed online surveys that explored what handholding means to same-sex couples. The data suggest that lesbians in the United States are more likely now than ¼ century ago to hold hands in public spaces. Younger lesbians are more likely to hold hands in public than older lesbians, and Canadian lesbians hold hands more often in public than American lesbians. In response to the question, "What does handholding mean to you?," 26% of the female respondents from North America overtly referred to public handholding as either a political act or a risky behavior. The number of comments of that nature was similar, regardless of whether the lesbians resided in the United States or Canada. Data suggest that full acceptance of same-sex couples in public spaces has not yet occurred, even in jurisdictions where same-sex couples have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. Although the sample size for males was too small to analyze the influence of age or political jurisdiction on public handholding, males, in general, were significantly less likely than females to view handholding as a means of staying "connected" with their partners.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".