Respecting variations in embodiment as well as gender: Beyond the presumed ‘binary’ of sex
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
Although societies and health care systems are increasingly recognizing gender outside traditional binary categories, the notion persists of two, and only two sexes, 'naturally' aligned between chromosomes and phenotypic body. Yet there are more than a dozen documented genetic or phenotypic variations that do not completely fit the two simplistic categories, and together, they may comprise 1%-2% of the population worldwide. In this commentary, I consider how adherence to binary notions of sex has created and maintained social and health care structures that perpetuate health care inequities, and may well violate our nursing codes of ethics. I provide some current examples in law and health care systems that create difficulties for people with variations in sex development. I describe our responsibility to challenge the societally promoted but scientifically inaccurate perspective of sex as a binary. I conclude by briefly suggesting a few implications for action within nursing research, nursing education, nursing practice, and in advocacy as a profession.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it