From Hegemonic to Where? The Public Spatialities of Shifting Positionings for Those Who Are Opposed to/Concerned About Socio‐Legal Changes in Sexual and Genders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 21st‐century Ireland, Canada and the Great Britain, significant changes to sexual and gender legislation, abortion access and associated social and cultural life include the legalisation of same‐sex marriage, employment rights, access to abortion and self‐identification/gender recognition. This paper draws on interviews from the Beyond Opposition research to explore the experiences of those who are concerned about and/or actively oppose these socio‐legal changes. We consider participants understandings of themselves as losing power within social relations and the ways in which their positionings can be seen as excluded or marginalised in public spaces. Examining their experiences of public space offers insights into experiences of new power relations, including state sanctions, that contest binaries of marginalisation/privilege. These positions between marginalisation/privilege, illustrate the effectiveness and limitations of framing these views as ‘unacceptable’ in public arenas. Operating between marginal/privileged requires a reworking of these 20th Century paradigms for 21st Century social divisions.
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) | 0.001 | 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".