The contested global politics of pleasure and danger: Sexuality, gender, health and human rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
brings together papers examining how sexuality, gender, health and human rights have become increasing visible and highly contested within global health. The papers included here question and explore the often contradictory processes through which global equity-seeking populations negotiate pleasure and danger across multiple arenas (including HIV and AIDS, LGBTQ+ health and rights, intersex rights, sex worker rights, realities of refugee and displaced persons, and gender-based violence) and in diverse geographic contexts (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Canada, Ghana, Haiti, Kenya, Mauritania, Nigeria, Peru, Rwanda, and the USA). These papers examine emerging questions about the gaps and limits in current legal structures that do not legitimize sexual rights as fundamental human rights, the role of agency (and of bounded agency) needed to navigate constrained contexts, ways in which community-based solidarity efforts shape access to sexual rights, and how sexual pleasure and consent are experienced and negotiated in rights-constrained contexts. The interdisciplinary authors included in this collection showcase how the ranging definitions of sexual rights, their enactment, and expressions of pleasure and danger are inextricably entangled with local contexts and cultural systems that underpin not only people's lived experience but simultaneously become central topics for global health research, policy and practice.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".