Women's Experiences of Sexual Agency Under Constrained Choice: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Western societies, women are encouraged to present themselves in sexualized ways and are expected to experience this as a form of sexual agency. However, research on women's sexual agency is new and still developing, leading to inconsistent definitions and understandings. In addition, women's experiences of and resistance to violations of their sexual boundaries are frequently overlooked. The current systematic review answers research questions on how sexual agency has been conceptualized, how it has been studied in relation to sexual violence, and how women's social positionality influences sexual agency. A systematic strategy was used to search 10 health and social science databases and analyze 95 full-text articles. A feminist social constructionist framework guided this mixed-methods synthesis and provided a framework for addressing the research questions. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how society and researchers understand women's sexual agency and how intersectionality is largely ignored. Findings also identify an urgent need for future research to consider the relations between violence against women and women's perceptions of (or lack of) sexual agency. Future policymakers, researchers, and educators should move away from a one-size-fits-all approach in their work and instead, consider the diverse impact of societal expectations on women. By doing so, we can develop policies and programming that are specifically tailored to address the unique needs and challenges faced by women in society.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it