“We Are Citizens”—Vulnerability and Privilege in the Experiences of Israeli Gay Men with Surrogacy in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the spring of 2013, I had the opportunity to accompany a group of Israeli gay couples to Mumbai to conduct ethnographic research on their experiences with transnational surrogacy. Based on this study, the article discusses their encounters with the Indian and Israeli bureaucracy establishing legal parenthood and citizenship to their children. The involved procedures seldom worked out smoothly, and brought about many moments of standstill. I suggest that these moments constituted crises of citizenship, in which the intended parents’ experiences clashed with their expectations towards the state and their place in the world. As both countries had no written policies with regards to transnational surrogacy, the protocols and requirements were in flux and left them with constant anxiety from the unknown and with the feeling that many of the requirements were arbitrary, even exploitative or spiteful. The very same moments also unveiled my interlocutors’ power, as agents and brokers—and at times even their social network back home—assisted them in the maze of bureaucracy and intervened on their behalf. Yet, their reliance on intermediators turned out to be a double-edged sword: The intended parents often felt that the middle men themselves were not engaged enough, overcharged them, or tricked them into additional payments. Vulnerability and privilege go here hand in hand, thus allowing for an understanding of intended parents that does not view them as either successful neoliberal citizens or vulnerable victims of the state.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".