Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay/review by Ruthann Robson and Tanya Kessler, published at 53 McGill Law Journal 535-571 (2008), situates Brenda Cossman's book Sexual Citizens in the context of sexual-citizenship discourse, which has arisen from the critique of dominant theories of that fail to recognize as gendered, racialized and sexualized. Cossman employs the term citizenship to mean not only a formal legal status, but also metaphorically as forms of belonging, recognition and participation. Using examples from popular culture, she seeks to illustrate that the emerging sexual of sexual minorities in the United States is overtly sexual, yet also privatized and self-disciplined. Using Sexual Citizens as an illustration, the authors suggest that sexual discourse currently neglects the issue of sexual minorities' access to formal citizenship. In many cases, formal status is even presumed. At a time of burgeoning repression of immigrants in the United States and elsewhere, sexual-citizenship discourse should be more cognizant of as a formal legal status and explore the manner in which immigration law regulates sexual practices. Although the language of can provide some valuable metaphors for sexual minorities and is an apt response where the nation-state invokes to regulate behaviour, this analysis should confront the notion of itself. Indeed, the rubric for theorizing the regulation of should not necessarily be citizenship, since it risks perpetuating the notion's noninclusiveness. The authors thus propose that a language of personhood may be more suitable in pursuing rights and participation for sexual minorities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".