Social Exclusion, Resilience and Social Worker Preparedness: Providing Services to Gay and Bisexual Men Who Party-<scp>n</scp>-Play
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Party-n-Play (PNP) refers to sex between gay and bisexual men that occurs under the influence of drugs. Growing evidence suggests gay and bisexual men who PNP experience significant stigma and social exclusion. Less is known about the resilience of this population. Utilising critical discourse analysis, this study examined how gay and bisexual men who PNP talk about social exclusion and resilience in their lives. In-depth one-hour interviews were conducted with forty-four gay and bisexual men who lived in Toronto, and who used various drugs before or during sex with another man in the previous month. Study findings revealed that social exclusion was perpetuated through discourses of stigma, deviance, morality, heteronormativity, homophobia, racism, classism, risk and policing. These discourses also negatively affected participants’ interactions with health care providers. However, many participants evoked resilience discourses and described social bonds, friendships and relations of care in their networks. Social work professionals would benefit from examining the roles of social exclusion, as well as stigmatising and pathologising discourses in their practice. These findings also underscore the need for culturally sensitive social work interventions for this population that address social exclusion and foster resilience.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".