Operationalising intersectionality in equality and domestic abuse policy in Scotland: Contradictions, contestations and erasure
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
This article synthesises the findings from two studies on the operationalisation of intersectionality in Scotland: one in equality policy and NGOs, and the other in domestic abuse policy-making. Drawing upon Ashlee Christoffersen's framework of applied concepts of intersectionality, this article analyses the competing and contradictory ways that intersectionality is institutionalised in Scottish policy and practice. It highlights the contestations and debates that arise when actors with varying understandings, agendas, and levels of political will attempt to apply intersectionality. We argue that dominant approaches to applying intersectionality in Scottish equality and domestic abuse policymaking are additive and superficial, a consequence of power inequalities shaping who has access to policymaking processes and institutions. Beyond the Scottish case, the article highlights key lessons concerning how to operationalise intersectionality in policy and practice in ways that are truer to its original conceptualisation in Black feminism.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it