Intimacy is a complex, multifaceted subject of importance within disability rights movements.Disabled individuals are entitled to the same universal human rights (e.g., marriage, sexual and reproductive self-determination) as everyone else.Assistive measures that support equity in their personal lives remain central to these movements.However, the research community's relatively narrow focus of what "intimacy" is (i.e., primarily concerned with sex) combined with factors, such as context, cultural sensitivities, power dynamics and complex ethics, has resulted in its limited exploration in HCI Accessibility Research.Among the relatively small body of HCI literature, most works approach disabled intimacies through a primarily deficit-oriented and heteronormative lens.Notably, ASSETS has featured only two papers on this subject in the past 23 years [53].Moreover, few studies in HCI explore the methodological and ethical considerations of researching disabled intimacies, and even fewer are disability-led and include queer perspectives [53].In this half-day virtual workshop, we invite engineers, technology design and development researchers, industry practitioners, accessibility * These authors contributed equally to this research and share first authorship of this publication.

Accessibility research can only serve the needs of marginalized populations by considering intersectional and critical frameworks that provide a complete picture of how access is created in different contexts.To identify the novel assistive practices of often ignored disabled communities, we present findings from 12 interviews with disabled sex workers (i.e., people who sell their own erotic labor) (e.g., escorting, webcamming, lap dancing).Based on their experiences, we present systems of access as a framework to analyze how disabled people develop access strategies in contexts that include stakeholders that actively intend them harm.By applying this framework, we call on researchers to: presume the presence of adversarial stakeholders in the lives of marginalized disabled communities, respect the consequence-based and harm-reduction practices of disabled people in these contexts, and seek out these marginalized communities with safe practices that prevent undue harm.

Growing recognition of the potential for exploitation of personal data and of the shortcomings of prior privacy regimes has led to the passage of a multitude of new privacy regulations. Some of these laws—notably the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)—have been the focus of large bodies of research by the computer science community, while others have received less attention. In this work, we analyze a set of 24 privacy laws and data protection regulations drawn from around the world—both those that have frequently been studied by computer scientists and those that have not—and develop a taxonomy of rights granted and obligations imposed by these laws. We then leverage this taxonomy to systematize 270 technical research papers published in computer science venues that investigate the impact of these laws and explore how technical solutions can complement legal protections. Finally, we analyze the results in this space through an inter-disciplinary lens and make recommendations for future work at the intersection of computer science and legal privacy.

Remote collaborations are becoming ubiquitous, but, despite their many advantages, face unique challenges compared to collocated collaborations. Visualizing the collaborator's point of gaze on a shared screen has been explored as a promising way to alleviate some of these limitations by increasing shared awareness. However, prior studies on shared gaze have not considered the medium of communication and have only studied its effect on audio. This paper presents a study that compares the effects of shared gaze on collaboration performance during audio- and text-based communication. We find that for text, shared gaze improved task correctness and led collaborators to look at and talk more about shared content. Similar trends are found for gaze-augmented voice communication, but contrary to the slower performance in text, it also saw improvements in completion time as well as in cognitive workload. Our findings demonstrate the differences in how shared gaze impacts audio- versus text-based communication and highlight the need to further understand the nuances of the medium of communication when designing novel tools to support remote collaborators.