You get to stop him! Gendered violence and interactive witnessing in Netflix’s <i>Kimmy vs The Reverend</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Across four seasons of her Netflix hit comedy, Kimmy Schmidt emerged as a strong, female survivor of sexual violence. However, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt would often walk a fine line between post-feminist and feminist understandings of rape and gendered violence, while reinforcing harmful racial tropes rooted in ‘white feminism’. In 2020, Netflix brought Kimmy back for her ‘biggest adventure yet’ in Kimmy vs the Reverend, but, this time, the viewer had the power, as the tagline read, to ‘decide what happens’, with Netflix’s interactive feature. The article argues that Netflix’s interactivity feature is employed in potentially transformative ways, providing a call-to-action to fans and implicating the audience as both spectators and witnesses to injustices of systemic violence against women. However, the 2020 film's investment in, and deployment of white feminist politics mirrors a broader media erasure of the experiences of racialised women, while closing down the interactive potential of identification across difference.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".