Cartographie des pornographies critiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis les années 1980, dans un mouvement corollaire au développement de la pornographie hardcore mainstream, plusieurs cinéastes femmes (cisgenres et transgenres) ont produit une pornographie critique prenant racine dans un féminisme pro-sexe. Qu’elle soit féministe, par et pour femmes, par et pour lesbiennes, queer, éducative, alternative ou indie, cette pornographie offre un discours critique sur la pornographie mainstream. Cet article propose une recension des différentes pratiques pornographiques critiques telles que présentées dans la littérature académique sur ces productions et dans les discours tenus par les réalisatrices. En plus de répertorier les différentes catégories, il s’agira de comprendre les liens que ces initiatives peuvent entretenir avec la pensée féministe pro-sexe et certains de ses indicateurs particuliers tels l’agentivité sexuelle des femmes, l’aspect central de la jouissance féminine ainsi que la subversion des codes du genre pornographique mainstream.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".