MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972100672 · doi:10.1080/14754835.2019.1647100

Resisting human rights through securitization: Russia and Hungary against LGBT rights

2019· article· en· W2972100672 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Human Rights · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecuritizationNorm (philosophy)Human rightsLesbianTransgenderPolitical sciencePhenomenonSociologyLawLaw and economicsPolitical economyGender studiesBusinessEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contributing to the literature on norm resistance and backlash, this article explores the phenomenon of norm immunization, that is, the creation of legal barriers by a state with the purpose of fending off a transnationally diffusing norm by blocking its local advocacy. How do norm immunizations occur? What conditions facilitate or hinder this process? Focused on the area of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights, the article’s main argument is that a state’s immunization against these rights is undertaken through the securitization of nontraditional sexual orientations and gender identities. The article applies the theorized securitization mechanism to the (attempted) immunization against LGBT rights in Russia and Hungary in the last decade and identifies the relevant differences between the two cases to inductively sketch a general explanation of the success and failure of norm immunization attempts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it