MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2572439900

Take My Breath Away: Competing Contexts between Domestic Violence, Kink and the Criminal Justice System in R. v. J.A.

2016· article· en· W2572439900 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ummni Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeCriminologyHumanitiesCriminal justiceSociologyLawPsychologyPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English Abstract: In the R. v. J.A. case, a man was criminally convicted for performing sexual activities on his partner while she was rendered unconscious through erotic asphyxiation. Evaluating the legal and ethical stakes of the case is challenging because the complainant changed her testimony from non-consent to consent at trial, and the couple’s history includes both kinky sex and domestic violence. In this paper, I problematize the legal reasoning of the trial judgment (R. v .A.(J.) 2008 ONCJ 195), the Supreme Court of Canada’s majority decision ([2011] 2 S.C.R. 440), as well as the LEAF factum, and some of the feminist commentary. I argue that both the legal and the feminist discourses privilege domestic and sexual violence as the preeminent context in this case, erase or gloss over kinky eroticism and subjectivity, and advance a carceral politics that privileges the criminal justice system as an articulator of truth, and a vehicle for gender justice.Spanish Abstract: En el caso R. v. J.A., se condeno penalmente a un hombre por llevar a cabo actividades sexuales con su pareja, despues de dejarla inconsciente mediante asfixia erotica. Evaluar las implicaciones legales y eticas del caso es un reto, porque la querellante cambio en el juicio su testimonio del no consentimiento al consentimiento, y la historia de la pareja incluye tanto el fetichismo sexual como la violencia domestica. En este articulo se problematiza sobre el razonamiento juridico de la sentencia (R. v. A. (J.) 2008 ONCJ 195), la decision mayoritaria del Tribunal Supremo de Canada ([2011] 2 RCS 440), asi como el factum LEAF, y algunos de los comentarios feministas. Se sostiene que tanto los discursos juridicos como los feministas consideran la violencia domestica y sexual como el contexto preeminente en este caso, borran o disimulan el fetichismo erotico y la subjetividad, y promueven una politica penitenciaria en la que el sistema de justicia penal es articulador de la verdad y vehiculo para la justicia de genero.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207