Disabilities and sexual expression: A review of the literature
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
Abstract Since the late 1980s and early 1990s, scholars have sought to advance a more nuanced and robust understanding of the sexual lives of disabled people. In doing so, these scholars have identified some of the barriers to sexual expression that disabled people face as well as some of the positive and pleasurable aspects of disabled people's sexual lives. This article reviews research regarding the sexual expression and activity of disabled people as well as some of the challenges to sexual expression that people with disabilities experience. Persons with disabilities—whether they are acquired, congenital, intellectual, physical, and/or sensorial impairments—continue to encounter alienation, stigmatization, and discrimination, particularly in terms of their sexuality. However, I argue that if proper laws, policies, and adequate supports are in place, people with disabilities can further challenge and push past these barriers to engage in a wide array of sexual and erotic acts. Furthermore, although the amount of disability‐sexuality‐related research has increased over past decades, I argue that many intersections of disability and sexuality remain under‐studied and that further research in this field is necessary.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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