“Everyone should get the chance to love”: Sexual health education and disability research-based theatre with self-advocates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Too often, individuals with intellectual and developmental disability (IDD) are left out of discussions on romantic relationships and sexuality. However, many individuals with IDD want to become sexually expressive, fulfilled persons who are sexually active, yet they are often denied the sexual health education to support their sexual agency. Given this, we conducted a three-year disability Research-based Theatre (RbT) project in New Westminster, British Columbia to better respond to the needs of individuals with IDD, who refer to themselves as self-advocates—those who speak and act with agency—regarding their sexual agency. The project, entitled Romance, Relationships, and Rights ( RRR), sought to disrupt sexual ableism, and present the lived experiences of self-advocates on stage. Throughout the three phases of RRR, the themes of sexual agency, self-advocacy, and self-determination arose. As an extension of this previous work, we take up these themes in a critical self-study where we reflect on the project across, within, and between each phase by focusing on the implications for sexual health education. We present findings about the impact of creating RRR to engage in a retrospective dialogue across all three phases to offer recommendations for intersectional, accessible, inclusive, and comprehensive sexual health education. Key recommendations include recognizing self-advocates’ rights to self-determination and sexual agency, active involvement, and hands-on approach to sexual health education where accessibility, flexibility, and an awareness of needs are built in to lesson plans and curriculum.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".