MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394933261 · doi:10.1177/13634607241246685

Anu’s story: Unpacking the conflation of sex work and sex trafficking

2024· article· en· W4394933261 on OpenAlex
Menaka Raguparan, Archana Raguparan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexualities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnpackingConflationSex workSex traffickingSex workersGender studiesWork (physics)SociologyPsychologyCriminologyHuman traffickingEpistemologyEngineeringMedicineDemographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using I-poems and poetic inquiry, this paper takes a case study approach to discuss the distinctions between consensual sex work and sex trafficking by situating the knowledge and lived experience of a first-generation South Asian Canadian independent indoor sex worker. Through Anu’s words describing her own experiences with both empowering work and instances of exploitation, this paper posits that engaging in the sex trade is legitimate work when workers have agency. Despite the stereotypes perpetuated in anti-trafficking discourse, especially of South Asian women, Anu defies the expected role of a helpless trafficking victim. In highlighting Anu’s story, we aim to provide a complexified and nuanced view of sex trafficking and its common conflation with consensual sex work. This conflation leads to further harm, as can be seen in Anu’s story, when anti-trafficking legal measures do not provide safety nor justice for sex workers who experience exploitation but are not perceived as adhering to controlling narratives of a “marketable victim.”

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.285 · 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