Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT.Sexual activity, like any other human activities, is multiple and diversified, including people who can not imagine sex but within its reproductive dimension as part of a marriage and people who embrace libertinage as a way of living. Some people prefer partners of the same sex, others can not find pleasure but with the opposite sex. Sex and love are not to be dissociated for some people, others turn sexuality into a gainful activity. A just settlement of the activity should bracket the different meanings each individual assigns to his erotic life. Thus, law reduces its intervention to two principles: individuals' consent and lack of damages for the partner.Keywords: sexuality, orientation, identity, discriminationSexual emancipation and pandemic AIDS expansion in the second half of the 20th century have placed sexuality in the heart of the political and social debate. Settled in the sphere of intimacy and private life, sexuality bursts into public space, firstly due to the political action of the feminism, then through the requisitions of the L.G.B.T. movement (lesbians, gay, bisexual, transsexual). Meanwhile, sexuality is the most difficult human activity, to free from the traditional morality and the medical speech, which often occludes a judicial analysis. A theory of the sexuality right would find its foundation in a laic, consented philosophy starting with the idea of the autonomous and responsible subject's will, who expresses his/her freedom by making reasonably choices.Sexual activity, like any other human activities, is multiple and diversified, including people who can not imagine sex but within its reproductive dimension as part of a marriage and people who embrace libertinage as a way of living. Some people prefer partners of the same sex, others can not find pleasure but with the opposite sex. Sex and love are not to be dissociated for some people, others turn sexuality into a gainful activity. A just settlement of the activity should bracket the different meanings each individual assigns to his erotic life. Thus, law reduces its intervention to two principles: individuals' consent and lack of damages for the partner.1Starting with a discretional reading of sexuality (meaning emancipated from traditions, doctrine or ideologies) and a modest concept of the law, this study is divided in three: the first part introduces the political and philosophical principles which stipulate life: the evolution of the foundation of the prohibitions, the margin of appreciating a status, law's intervention to limit individual will, the tension between freedom, equality and human dignity; the second part analyses aspects related to freedom, equality (man-woman) and sexualities (homosexuality-heterosexuality) and criminal offences; the third part includes and analyses precise examples of sexuality (prostitution, pornography, pedophilia, harassment) based on classic summa division: consented sexuality - borne (forced) sexuality. A specific study of the main international conventions referring to and reproductive rights, the right to asylum of the minorities and the fight against tourism is carried out.1. orientationSexual is the affective and desire, the erotic appeal for people of the same sex (sexual homosexual orientation), or indistinguishably, for the same or the opposite sex (sexual bisexual orientation). Sexual orientation phrase firstly appeared in 1972 in a legal stipulation in Michigan, then in a couple of laws in the district of Columbia and Washington in U.S.A., in order to sanction the discriminations regarding homosexuals. The charter of the human being's rights from Quebec, in 1977 was the first constitutional stipulation to establish a specific protection against discriminations regarding orientation. For the European level, article 13 in Amsterdam Treaty places the phrase sexual orientation in a stipulation which obliges U. …
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".