MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747886580 · doi:10.5216/rir.v13i2.46455

BEFORE AND AFTER MISOGYNY: A Psychoanalytic Discussion

2017· article· en· W2747886580 on OpenAlexaff
Deborah P. Britzman

Bibliographic record

VenueItinerarius Reflectionis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalytic theoryNegationOmnipotencePsychoanalysisTemporalityObjectificationHatredDenialPsychologyThe SymbolicPerversionSociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: For those of us working in the fields of education and psychotherapy, the insistence that misogyny affects us all brings to the forefront the painful question of lifting negation in order to think of one’s own contribution to disclaimed bodily hatred. Thinking with the psychoanalytic temporality of before and after, misogyny is approached as a mental constellation of the mind’s attraction to the disavowal, objectification, and depersonalization of gender and sexual fluidity. I examine the psychical consequences of the emotional logic of insidious misogyny in practices of education and the clinic that resists working through their role in dissociated externalized mental states. My focus is on the generation and diffusion of psychical defences of ideality, splitting, denial, and disavowal of difference that compel phantasies of omnipotence and present as attacks on what comes before and after the human condition, namely: natality, bisexuality, dependency, vulnerability, and love for the maternal environment. Themes of feminism, psychoanalysis, and queer theory are offered as a counter-depressant.Keywords: thinking, deferred action, negation, ideality, symbolic collapse, reparation.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.048
Scholarly communication0.0090.013
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueItinerarius ReflectionisSame topicPsychology and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207