Rape & Survival within Counter-geographies: (Dis)Pleasure in Disrupting Globalized Universals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is already significant scholarship (Heaton; Hesford, Huggan, Powell) which demonstrates that metanarratives, largely produced and consumed by Western audiences contribute to the rhetorical choices of the subaltern’s stories as well as listeners’ interpretation/ validation of place-based experiences. This paper further contributes to this work by examining how humanitarian narratives which utilize rape as a means of rhetorical agency within counter-geographies (Sassen) is a starting place for postcolonial conversations about pathways for mindful, global intervention within local contexts. I briefly examine two cultural representations of humanitarian rape narratives (human interest news story and fiction) to illustrate the complex rhetorics of humanitarian rape narratives and how individuals perform commodified identities within humanitarian contexts. Ultimately, I advocate for a deconstruction of the universal humanitarian rape narrative through rhetorical ecology theory (Biesecker, Edbauer) in order to resist the constricting perspectives and solutions resulting from globalization.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".