The decriminalization of same-sex relations in Botswana: National, regional and international dimensions of LGBTQI+ activism
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 examines the first instance in the past 25 years of the decriminalization of same-sex relations in Africa via strategic litigation. It asks: What are the main factors that contributed to decriminalization in Botswana in 2019? What relative role did national, regional and international actors play? Drawing in part on interviews with key actors and observers in Southern Africa, it argues that Botswanan LGBTQI+ activists’ efforts outside the courtroom played a key role. They mobilized crucial support, expertise and financial resources of allies at home and elsewhere in Southern Africa, with some financial assistance from the Southern African affiliate of an international philanthropic network. Nonetheless, national activists maintained ownership of the process. The case thus contradicts assumptions in the literature that when human rights activists obtain assistance from transnational activist networks, the aid comes from the Global North and the international actors dominate the process.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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