Disciplining Bodies, Desires and Subjectivities: Sexuality and HIV-Positive Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very little is known about the sexuality of women who are living with HIV, outside the context of risk prevention and education. Available research in the first-world context shows that, although most women continue to be sexually active following diagnosis, decreased sexual functioning is very common and more prevalent than among HIV-positive men. The present multi-site Canadian study is concerned with the ways in which women’s sexuality is transformed by the experience of living with HIV. Semi-structured interviews with 20 women were analysed using thematic decomposition, an analytic technique that combines discursive approaches with thematic analysis. The women in this study construct HIV as inhibiting in relation to sexuality. A predominant discourse of disciplining bodies, desires and subjectivities emerges, which centers on the restrictions imposed by an HIV-positive diagnosis. The following discursive constructions, in particular, emerge from the women’s accounts: diminished spontaneity, foreclosed (provisional) sexual freedom, foreclosed power, foreclosed flirtation, inciting violence, (un)natural sex, responsibility imperatives, muted/mutated sexuality, and diminished intimacy. The women’s predominant positioning within AIDS discourses as conduits of transmission, the relative neglect of women’s psychological and sexual health concerns in both research and public health agendas, and women’s relatively anomalous standing in AIDS communities imposes limits on bodies, lives, and subjectivities. These are reflected in these women’s accounts, wherein a focus on protecting others frequently impedes access to fulfilling (and safe) sexual and emotional relationships.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".