MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403873379 · doi:10.1080/17449057.2024.2412503

Contesting Power-Sharing? LGBTQ+ Activism and the Sexual Citizenship of Consociationalism

2024· article· en· W4403873379 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnopolitics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastVillanova University
KeywordsCitizenshipPower sharingPolitical sciencePower (physics)Gender studiesPolitical economySociologyPoliticsLawPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notwithstanding valuable contributions, the relationship between power-sharing and sexuality remains undertheorized. This paper asks if consociationalism can be seen as a form of sexual citizenship, whereby rights are granted or denied based on sexuality. The question is applied to the case of Northern Ireland, through a review of the extant scholarship, analysis of the consociational institutions, and semi-structured interviews with LGBTQ+ activists and other relevant actors. The paper argues that power-sharing is not only exclusionary of LGBTQ+ rights, but fundamentally produces sexual citizenship, a system that demarcates the boundaries of inclusion into the state in terms of sexual orientation. Furthermore, its findings demonstrate creative, but also calculated agency by activists to navigate this ethnicized context in pursuit of rights.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it