Addressing Patron-Perpetrated Sexual Harassment: Opportunities for Intersectional Feminist and Critical Race Pedagogy and Praxis in the LIS Classroom
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
It is becoming increasingly clear that sexual harassment is a serious problem within libraries. In particular, patron-perpetrated sexual harassment is the sexual harassment of library staff by the very patrons they endeavor to support. In this paper we identify and apply intersectional feminist and critical race and whiteness theories that unearth the structural underpinnings that support patron-perpetrated sexual harassment. We do so both to make this issue visible as well as to offer theoretical frameworks that might be taken up by LIS educators to address this topic within their classrooms. A comprehensive and nuanced examination of gender, race, and their intersections in LIS is necessary to recognize, name, and resist acts of gender-based violence such as patron-perpetrated sexual harassment. We call for a slow interconnected pedagogical approach that connects theory to practice, supports the use of critical theory to rigorously interpret the core values of librarianship, and is supported by the voices and perspectives of those working in libraries.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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