MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7062137736

Silence that matters: HIV Nondisclosure and the limits of Consent

2023· other· en· W7062137736 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminalizationHuman sexualitySilenceSupreme courtCriminal lawInterpretation (philosophy)SanctionsHomosexualityHarm
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation explores the legal and sociocultural linguistic implications of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Cuerrier (1998) where it was ruled that the nondisclosure of HIV-positive status could vitiate otherwise freely given consent, resulting in the sexual act being deemed aggravated assault or aggravated sexual assault. Specifically, I am interested in how the logic of HIV nondisclosure law is deeply interwoven with heteronormative assumptions about sexuality and how consent is negotiated in practice. To interrogate the often-unstated assumptions underlying the Court’s decision, I examine how the legal imperative to speak about one’s HIV status is resolved within gay sexual spaces (where consent is customarily negotiated wordlessly). My goal, in doing this, is to identify how these competing imperatives (i.e., the legal obligation to speak and a custom of staying silent) are resolved within cultural and linguistic practice. \n \nIn this study, I use autoethnography, semi-structured interviews, and legal analysis to examine the legal and political implications of the criminalization of HIV nondisclosure. My findings suggest that existing approaches to HIV nondisclosure in criminal law are insufficiently attentive to how regulatory apparatuses, including social norms, shape the interpretation of sexual practices. This often results in courts confounding sexual diversity with sexual violence, which continues a long-held tradition of criminalizing sexual minorities. Guided by these insights, my legal analysis challenges the logic of HIV nondisclosure law more directly. Specifically, I argue that privileging putatively “rational” faculties, like autonomy, in the regulation of sexualities fails to adequately capture the complexities embodied in sex and negotiations of sexual consent. As an alternative, I offer a new model—what I call bodily subjectivity—to more fully capture the visceral harm enacted by acts of sexual assault.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.088
Scholarly communication0.0110.014
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→