Turning the Table: Rethinking Sexuality Education for 2SLGBTQ+ Disabled People
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disability and sexuality remain under-explored areas within mainstream sex education, particularly when it comes to centering the experiences and insights of 2SLGBTQ+ disabled individuals. Traditional models of sexuality education have focused disproportionately on risk prevention and pathology. However, disabled people have long developed innovative strategies, frameworks, and understandings of sexuality that exceed the limited scope of such programs. We suggest that a ‘crip’ lens, which reclaims disability as a positive and transformative identity marker, can inform more inclusive and empowering sexuality education. By centering disabled voices and experiences, it is possible to highlight the sexual knowledge, adaptability, and expertise that disabled people bring to intimate relationships. This paper calls for participatory methods that honor disabled individuals as knowledge creators. Ultimately, recognizing the wisdom of 2SLGBTQ+ disabled people can radically reshape broader discussions of sex, pleasure, relationships, and desire, offering lessons not only for disabled communities but for society at large.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 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".