“Kicked out”: LGBTQ youths' bathroom experiences and preferences
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
Attention toward who can use which gender binary, multi-stall bathroom has brought to the forefront, once again, the ways in which youth are supported or marginalized. No study has documented sexual and gender minority youths' experiences with and perspectives about bathrooms. We collected qualitative data in 2014-2015. Participants were 25 lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) youth, aged 14-19, in the United States and Canada. Their comments describe first- and second-hand bathroom experiences, identify advocacy efforts, and highlight the roles of peers and adults in making bathrooms safe (or not). Youth emphasized the importance of gender-neutral bathrooms in fostering a sense of safety and inclusivity. Adult support and gay-straight alliances (GSAs) were important contributors to a welcoming environment and fostered advocacy efforts for gender-neutral bathrooms. We encourage purposeful inclusivity of youths' voices when enacting bathroom-specific policies and legislation that directly influence their health and well-being.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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