Agentivité sexuelle des conjointes d’hommes trans : traverser le parcours d’affirmation de genre pour mieux se rencontrer
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
The experiences of trans men’s loved ones, and more specifically of romantic partners, remain under researched. Yet these loved ones go through a process that can take years, involving physical changes to their partner and shifting perceptions of their couple in the eyes of society. This is the case for cisgender women whose trans male partners undergo gender affirmation surgery. We conducted open-ended interviews with 13 women from a non-urban region of Quebec to better understand their experiences and the effects of their partner’s transition on their sexual agency. The transition is a long and complex journey, and initial changes can give rise to anxieties and avoidance reactions in partners as they adjust to a new physicality. However, with the reduction in gender dysphoria, particularly through torsoplasty, women report that their relationship is more fulfilling and authentic than before, both sexually and in their relationship. The caring attitude of the partners who participated in our research helped them to navigate this transition and emerge from it with a greater degree of intimacy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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