MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130273024 · doi:10.1093/sp/jxg018

Morality, Censorship, and Discrimination: Reframing the Pornography Debate in Germany and Europe

2003· article· en· W2130273024 on OpenAlexaff
Heather MacRae

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingPornographyGermanCensorshipPolitical scienceMoralityCriminologySociologyLawSocial psychologyPsychologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German state has traditionally regulated the distribution of pornography based on the perceived need to protect the moral development of minors. In recent years, feminists have attempted to demonstrate that pornography is not only dangerous for youth but is a form of violence and discrimination against women. This article addresses the attempt by feminists to reframe the regulation of pornography at the German and the European levels. It argues that although several factors limited their success at the German level, feminists are finding that the European level might offer new opportunities to reframe the pornography debate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & SocietySame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207