<i>Every Breath You Take:</i> Erotic Asphyxiation, Vengeful Wives, and Other Enduring Myths in Spousal Sexual Assault Prosecutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'importante décision de la Cour suprême du Canada dans l'arrêt J.A. devrait faire cesser le recours à la défense invoquant le consentement donné à l'avance, offrant ainsi une protection contre les agressions sexuelles aux femmes qui se retrouvent inconscientes pour quelque raison que ce soit. Même si une analyse plus profonde du cas et de la jurisprudence connexe révèle que les praticiens du sadomasochisme ont peu de raisons de craindre des poursuites criminelles au Canada, la présente analyse met en lumière d'autres problèmes sérieux, par exemple en ce qui concerne les poursuites pour agressions sexuelles entre conjoints, y compris le fait de minimiser les risques reliés à l’étranglement, une volonté de considérer la violence comme agréable et l'invocation constante du comportement sexuel antérieur sans plus d'information sur le contexte, notamment les actes de violence antérieurs du défendeur contre la plaignante. De plus, l'article remet en question la nécessité et l’à-propos de la preuve d'experts dans des cas d'agression sexuelle dans un contexte conjugal.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".