Erotic capabilities: A feminist analysis of sexual justice and pleasure in heterosexual sex partying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In gender and sexuality studies, heterosexual sex has often been portrayed in terms of inequality and injustice; however, there has been scant discussion of what social conditions may cultivate a democratic and egalitarian culture that sustains sexual autonomy. Developed from Nussbaum’s capabilities approach, I propose the erotic capabilities approach to assess and promote entitlement to erotic choices and erotic freedoms in everyday practice. I argue that erotic capabilities should consist of the following: (1) freedom from sexual coercion and deprivation; (2) democratized sexual knowledge; (3) sexual health options; (4) inclusive space for diversified erotic expressions; (5) erotic affiliation and negotiation; and (6) diversified erotic aspirations, fulfilments and experimentations. Drawing on a 29-month ethnography of a sex party club in Hong Kong, I demonstrate how the erotic capabilities approach can be used in a meso-level analysis to evaluate a sexual space or community which, while situated in the overarching patriarchal ideology, may or may not offer a reflexive space for its participants to define their erotic selves. As this study formulates sexuality as a vehicle of empowerment that can and should be cultivated and actualized, it illuminates the possibility to imagine and create agentic and pleasurable opportunities for people in different social locations under the patriarchy we still live in.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".