MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968337119

Re(de)fining Prostitution and Sex Work: Conceptual Clarity for Legal Thinking

2019· article· en· W2968337119 on OpenAlexaffabout
Debra M Haak

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSex workCriminologyPolitical scienceHuman sexualityLegislatureAgency (philosophy)Criminal lawLawSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act criminalized the purchase of sexual services, making prostitution illegal for the first time in Canada. This legislative approach to prostitution aims to end demand for prostitution with a goal of ending the practice itself, based on an understanding of the activity of prostitution as sexual exploitation, a cause and consequence of gender inequality, and a form of violence disproportionately impacting women and girls. Opposition to this legislative approach to prostitution is largely founded on an understanding of sex work as legitimate work, reflecting the exercise of choice and agency, and a site to expand the boundaries of sexuality and gender. Critics argue that consensual exchanges of sexual acts for compensation between adults should not be subject to criminal sanction. In 2017, the first constitutional challenge to three of the new criminal offences applicable to adult prostitution was commenced, founded on the contention that the impugned provisions violate constitutional rights of “escorts and other sex workers.” In this article, I break with the ideological contours of the debate to examine the word “prostitution” as it is legally defined in Canada, and the term “sex work” as it has evolved and is employed in recent jurisprudence, empirical research, and contemporary texts promoting sex workers’ rights. I argue that the word prostitution and the term sex work are not synonymous and that legal decision makers must attend to how the word and term are used in legal texts and contexts. Where prostitution has been legally defined in Canada to refer to the act of exchanging sexual services for payment or consideration, the term sex work has not been defined in jurisprudence or statute. The term sex worker is usually used to refer to a subset of prostitution participants bearing certain characteristics, most notably that they be adults who are not trafficked and who consent to the exchange of their own sexual services for consideration. The term sex work is also sometimes used to describe activities that fall outside of the legal definition of prostitution, such as pornography and exotic dancing. Understanding how the word prostitution and the term sex work are defined and used has the potential to more clearly illuminate whose interests and experiences are and are not reflected in existing theoretical and empirical literature and to ground more nuanced evaluation of constitutional challenges founded on sex workers’ rights claims.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.170
Scholarly communication0.0260.019
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0160.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207