Reform to abolish : a pragmatic analysis of prison labor & strip searches in Quebec correctional law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans la derniere annee, des themes abolitionnistes ont ete au coeur de mobilisations comme #BlackLivesMatter, #MoiAussi, et #LiberezLesTous. Cet article s’inspire d’une methodologie socio-legale et feministe pour proposer une analyse pragmatique et abolitionniste de la Loi sur le systeme correctionnel du Quebec (LSCQ). Je presente deux enjeux refletant des torts structurels perpetues dans les prisons pour femmes – le travail et les fouilles a nu – et soutiens que ces pratiques instillent des torts corporels quotidiens vu leur cadrage au sein de la LSCQ. Bien que le travail en prison soit presente comme moyen de reinsertion sociale, vu la LSCQ les femmes recoivent des salaires inadequats relatifs au cout de vie en prison, ce qui limite l’acces aux produits menstruels et peut mener a des alternatives dangereuses. Pour ce qui est des fouilles a nu, celles-ci sont presentees comme favorisant la securite de l’institution mais sont subies comme agressions sexuelles infligees par l’etat. La LSCQ prevoit que ces fouilles puissent etre conduites dans une variete de circonstances a la discretion des agents correctionnels, laissant ainsi place a une application discriminatoire des reglements et exposant les femmes racisees a davantage de violences en detention. Je conclus en presentant des reformes abolitionnistes qui pourront reduire ces torts corporels quotidiens a court terme. J’appelle aussi a une solidarisation avec les personnes incarcerees au sein des mouvements sociaux.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".