MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291815873 · doi:10.4000/clio.12778

Les âges du consentement. Militantisme gai et sexualité des mineurs en France et au Québec (1970-1980)

2015· article· fr· W2291815873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean Bérard, Nicolas Sallée

Bibliographic record

VenueClio · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunism, Protests, Social Movements
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInternational Centre for Comparative Criminology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesHuman sexualityPolitical scienceSociologyArtGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article analyse la manière dont les mouvements gais militants des années 1970 ont amorcé une politisation de la question de la majorité sexuelle, préalable à une série de réformes entreprises dans les années 1980. Au début des années 1970, ces mouvements font face à un enjeu comparable, en France et au Québec : l’âge de la majorité sexuelle, plus élevée pour les homosexuels, soulève la question de la liberté sexuelle des mineurs. Dans les deux pays, l’histoire des mouvements gais suit une trajectoire parallèle. Fondés en lien avec des mouvements politiques révolutionnaires, les mouvements gais se restructurent, au milieu des années 1970, autour de revendications plus ciblées, liées notamment à la discrimination légale dont les homosexuels sont victimes concernant l’âge de la majorité sexuelle. Dans les années 1980, les lois qui en résultent redéfinissent presque en même temps la majorité sexuelle et le viol. Elles dessinent un processus similaire en France et au Canada : si la majorité sexuelle est réformée, son principe est réaffirmé, comme un rempart contre la nouvelle figure du danger, le pédophile.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClioSame topicCommunism, Protests, Social MovementsFrench-language works237,207