MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101578596 · doi:10.20381/ruor-4489

Gender Representation in the Media : A Critical Analysis of the Construction of Female Sexuality in Men's Pornographic and Non-Pornographic Magazines

2011· dissertation· en· W2101578596 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jennifer Tognela

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityRepresentation (politics)Gender studiesPsychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis applies the radical feminist perspective set out by MacKinnon (1993) and Dworkin (1995), to analyze the construction of female sexuality within popular Canadian men’s pornographic magazines and non-pornographic magazines. A mixed methods approach was used to analyze the images and text within the feature articles of the selected magazines. Results revealed that women continue to be constructed as sexual objects within both categories of magazines, but the earlier link identified by MacKinnon and Dworkin between violence and sexuality was on longer apparent. Instead, women were a sexual puzzle that the magazines attempted to unpack. Rather than a strict dichotomy between pornographic and non-pornographic magazines, a continuum of grey emerged whereby the level of explicitness between the two magazines increased as the continuum progressed from left to right, thereby demonstrating the pornographication of mainstream media, as per McNair (2002).

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)0.006
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207