A Glimpse into Neuroqueer Youth #Hashtags and Posts: A Rights-Based Critical Discourse Analysis of Power, Discourse, Value, and Identity from Neuroqueer Youths’ Online Assertions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neuroqueer (neurodivergent and queer) youth internationally face significant challenges, including violence, harassment, and marginalization, both individually and systemically. This treatment “Others” them, complicating their perceived level of humanness within society, while often undermining their fundamental rights. Despite the formal documentation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) (United Nations, 1989), youth rights, particularly within the neuroqueer intersection, remain relatively unexplored in research. Through a critical discourse analysis using critical disability studies, specifically adopting Fairclough’s (1995) three-dimensional model, this qualitative study examined 24 social media posts, investigating how neuroqueer youth assert themselves, and reviewing the implications of their representations, including the connections to their rights, specifically participation rights. It highlighted how discursive practices and hegemonic power dynamics shape the lives and rights of these youth, particularly in the realms of power, participation, identity, and value. The data revealed four prominent themes: intersectionality; harm, abuse, and trauma; protection; and youth liberation and power. These themes emphasized the significance of intersectionality and social positioning in shaping the social experiences of neuroqueer youth, the presence of harm, abuse, and trauma at both systemic and individual levels, the need to safeguard and validate their essential needs and existences, and the call for (neuroqueer) youth liberation through the recognition of their agency and humanity. This study holds the potential to advocate for the rights and value of neuroqueer youth, promoting their active participation in shaping their own lives and discourse, affirming and including their identity/identities, agency, and capacities, and illuminating the impact of discourse and power dynamics that impact their participation, safety, and perceived worth through the perpetuation of adultism, heteronormativity, and neurotypicality. Drawing from existing literature, several recommendations emerge for fostering a safer, more inclusive world for neuroqueer youth in institutional, familial, and interpersonal spheres.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".