MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962064353

Rape & Survival within Counter-geographies: (Dis)Pleasure in Disrupting Globalized Universals

2019· article· en· W2962064353 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mónica Montaño Reyes, Rio Grande Valley

Bibliographic record

VenuePostcolonial text · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeRhetorical questionScholarshipSociologyCommodificationAgency (philosophy)Interpretation (philosophy)Deconstruction (building)AestheticsSubalternMedia studiesGender studiesPolitical scienceSocial scienceLiteratureArtLawLinguisticsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.004
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.047
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePostcolonial textSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207