MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1929571418 · doi:10.32396/usurj.v1i2.8

Unearthing “New” Eroticisms: Feminist Theory as Transformational in “Aberrant” Sexual Desires and Practices

2015· article· en· W1929571418 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Heather Kevill

Bibliographic record

VenueUSURJ University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPornographyHuman sexualityFeminismGender studiesFeminist theoryLesbianEroticismSociologyOrgasmHegemonyPsychoanalysisPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines three elements of female sexuality: the clitoral orgasm, lesbianism, and feminist pornography. All three of these elements have traditionally been viewed as deviant in hegemonic discourse. Over the years, feminist theory and practices have transformed (or are transforming) each element from aberrant sites of desire to new modes of feminist knowledges. The female orgasm and lesbian identities were once “new” knowledge within feminism, and now feminist pornography emerges as an entirely reconceptualized way of exploring women’s desires, sexuality, and eroticism. With the aid of Elizabeth’s Grosz’s essay “The Future of Feminist Theory: Dreams for New Knowledges,” this paper demonstrates how feminist theory has served in re-imagining female sexual desires, practices, and identities.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.119
Scholarly communication0.0120.013
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSURJ University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research JournalSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207