Men’s role in violence against women in disasters: studies in Iran and Australia
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
Sexual violence is largely absent from studies on violence against women in disasters. The role of men in perpetrating violence against women is overlooked or excused and women are usually blamed in both countries. A review of 2 studies of men’s violence against women after floods and earthquakes in Iran and bushfires in Australia show remarkable similarities. Although cultural contexts and the way gender inequality is established and demonstrated are different, these studies reveal unexpected parallels. The context of disaster lays it bare. Participants of both studies were disaster-affected people in Iran and Australia who revealed the taboos that prevent women speaking of violence that is exacerbated in a disaster context. Men play important roles in preventing and responding to violence against women as the result of their responsibilities and positions at the household and community levels. The objective of this paper was to compare the findings from these studies and consider the difficulties faced in conducting studies related to the roles of men and women roles during and after disaster events.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it