Rape in the Nordic Countries : Continuity and Change (Edition 1)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Situations involving unwanted sexual touching are analysed in this chapter in an effort to enhance our understanding of the social dynamics of this particular form of invading behaviour against girls and young women. The analysis is grounded in a situational perspective that draws on Collins’s (2009) micro-sociological approach to the study of violence. The data consist of short written descriptions of situations involving unwanted touching drawn from a large-scale survey study conducted among Norwegian youths (aged 18–19 years). Departing from a normative concept of sexual violence that posits that sexual violence harms a person’s ‘gender freedom’ (Stang Dahl, 1994), I show that acts of unwanted sexual touching are context-dependent occurrences. In some socio-spatial contexts, they represent sexual violence, while in other contexts they do not. In some situations, the act itself is unstable, fleeting and open to different interpretations. But incidents of unwanted touching are also problematic even when they do not harm someone’s gender freedom, as they may contribute to a diffuse ‘phenomenology of fear’ among girls and women: the embodied knowledge that their right to bodily integrity is less protected than that of boys and men.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".