MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1608472228

Entre libération et représentation réductrice : La pornographie gaie masculine comme véhicule de stéréotypes

2010· article· fr· W1608472228 on OpenAlexaff
Geneviève Rail, Simon Corneau, Dave Holmes

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociologyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspirée d’un cadre poststructuraliste, cette étude qualitative de « réception d’un médium » nous a permis de mettre en lumière les « lectures » que font une vingtaine de consommateurs de pornographie des notions de masculinité, de race et ethnicité, du milieu gai et du genre en lien avec la pornographie qu’ils consomment. Les résultats qui émergent de notre analyse critique de discours sont à l’effet que les lectures des consommateurs sont majoritairement dominantes, reproduisant ainsi les stéréotypes présents en société et qui sont re/produits et véhiculés dans la pornographie qu’ils consomment. Les récits des participants attestent du fait que ces derniers remettent peu en question ce qu’ils voient dans le matériel pornographique ; matériel pouvant avoir certaines répercussions sur des indicateurs de santé mentale en accentuant et perpétuant certaines formes de stigmatisation chez certains groupes sociaux. Inspired by a poststructuralist perspective, our qualitative exploratory media reception study offers a critical discourse analysis of 20 male pornography consumers, focusing on their readings of masculinity, race/ethnicity, the gay world, and gender in relation to the pornography they consume. For the most part, results show dominant readings of these categories, which suggests that social stereotypes are produced, reproduced, and transmitted through the medium of pornography. Participant narratives reveal individuals who rarely question what is shown in pornographic material; the latter having potential implications for certain mental health indicators, as well as perpetuating and accentuating forms of stigmatization among specific social groups.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.048
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207