Le pourquoi du spectacle : motivations relatives à la consommation de pornographie chez les hommes gais
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pornography consumption appears to be more accepted and normalized among gay males than among heterosexual men. Nevertheless, what motivates the consumption of pornography remains understudied. Using a poststructuralist approach, we conducted an exploratory audience research that allowed us to document the motivations of consumers of gay male pornography through the narratives of twenty users from Toronto (Canada). Using a thematic and a critical discourse analysis, we found that the motivations can be grouped around four main concepts: sexual satisfaction, fantasy exploration, escapism, and finally, protection from others. Our critical discourse analysis suggests that participants construct their subjectivity from alternative discourses on sexuality, dominant discourses on individualism, consumption and health, and contradictory discourses on risk. Using society of spectacle, society of consumption, scientia sexualis and ars erotica as main theoretical concepts, we conclude that pornography is part of the apparatus [dispositif] of sexuality in the Foucauldian sense, an apparatus that maintains sex at a discursive level.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".