“I Wouldn’t Believe Her at First”—A Qualitative Study of Young People’s Sexual Consent Perceptions and Negotiation in Nairobi Informal Settlements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forced or coerced sexual experiences have serious consequences for young people’s health and well-being. Healthy sexual consent communication can foster positive intimate relationships and help prevent unwanted sexual experiences. We aimed to explore how young people in Nairobi’s informal settlements construct, communicate, and negotiate sexual consent within heterosexual partnerships, given the limited insight into such experiences from resource-poor, global-south contexts. A qualitative study with young men and women aged 15 to 21 years was conducted among former participants of a school-based sexual violence prevention intervention in four informal settlements (slums) of Nairobi. Twenty-one individual in-depth interviews ( n = 10 females, n = 11 males) and 10 focus group discussions (five with n = 6–11 males vs. females, respectively), that is, n = 89 in total were conducted. Data were analysed using thematic network analysis and interpreted using the Sexual script theory. Participants’ endorsement of incongruent sexual scripts shaped their perceptions and negotiations of sexual consent. Young men were committed to respecting sexual consent, but promoted male (sexual) dominance, and perceived women’s refusals as token resistance. Per traditional scripts of sexual chastity, young women were largely bound by their use of a “soft no” to give consent, so as to not display direct sexual interest. Actual non-assertive refusals thus risked being interpreted as consent. Young women’s “actual” refusals had to be more assertive (saying a “hard no”) and were described as having been influenced by skills learned during the school-based intervention. Findings highlight the need for sexual consent education to address internalized gendered norms about female token resistance, destigmatize female sexuality, reduce male dominance norms, and encourage young people’s respect for both assertive and non-assertive sexual consent communication.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".