Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feminism is understood to be not only about equality for women as a group, but also about personal choices in a gender-unequal world. In this paper, I examine whether feminist identity is associated with solo and partnered sexual behavior. Using an original, representative survey of adult Canadian women (N=1,126), I employ ordinal logistic and logistic regression analyses to assess the relationship between feminist identity and sexual behavior. I find that those who call themselves feminists report having more recently masturbated than non-feminist women. In addition, I find that in partnered sexual encounters, feminists are more likely to participate in anal play, as well as engage in more kissing, cuddling and massage than non-feminists. I also find that feminist women are more likely to receive oral sex than non-feminists. These findings contribute to our understanding of feminist identity as tied to women’s personal lives, extending this association to the realm of sexual activity. In this case, the political is not only personal, it is intimate as well. Claiming a feminist identity is aligned with an approach to sexuality that includes a wider array of intimate and sexual behaviors that center women’s sexual and emotional needs in partnered encounters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".