Gendered meanings and mechanisms of intimacy for people living with chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cisheteronormative assumptions about women as able-bodied caregivers responsible for men's sexual pleasure compound the stigma associated with chronic pain because of an assumed inability to fulfil gender roles in intimate relationships. There is a need to move beyond this deficit model of gender, chronic pain and intimacy. People of all gender identities live with chronic pain, forming fulfilling intimate relationships regardless of their condition(s). Starting from a strengths-based assumption that individuals living with chronic pain develop their own understanding of and pathways to intimacy, I conducted written interviews with thirteen people living with a range of pain and pain-related conditions to theorise gendered differences in understandings and experiences of intimacy in the context of dating. Findings show that intimacy is associated with vulnerability and authenticity. These connotations vary between men, women and gender diverse participants, aligning with gendered socialisation about intimacy and relationships. Men tend to prioritise physical intimacy. Women and gender diverse participants emphasise their obligation to perform the labour necessary for forming and maintaining connections. However, regardless of gender, experiencing intimacy requires implementing flexible approaches to dating because doing so makes closeness accessible.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".