«Proteger sans censurer» : la politique de classement des films de sexploitation au Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article tries to address the following questions: which national apparatuses, cultural forces and social institutions have made a move to oppose the proliferation of pornography? What are, on a national level, the policies of the single nation-states towards it? The title of the article comes from the official statements of the Government of Québec, through its Régie du cinéma: "Since the mid 1960s, censorship is no longer practised in Québec. [...] However, when the Régie believes that a film presents a real danger to the public good, especially in terms of obscenity, it reserves the right to refuse classification. In such cases, the showing, sale and rental of the film are prohibited". The question is: when does obscenity cause a "real danger to the public good"? The Government asserts that it happens with films involving "non-fictional violence, cruelty and dehumanization of the protagonists." Interestingly, the complete official statements use theoretical tools that seem to be taken from André Bazin's theories, namely the concepts of "photographic evidence" and "film ontology", to address this issues. Starting from this use of these notions by the Régie du cinema, the author will investigate the ontological argument applied to pornography, using an interdisciplinary approach: ethics of care, history of film techniques, and analytical philosophy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".