MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404886053 · doi:10.1177/13634607241305579

The definitional creep: Payment processing and the moral ordering of sexual content

2024· article· en· W4404886053 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSexualities · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsContent (measure theory)PaymentCreepPsychologySocial psychologyBusinessMaterials scienceMetallurgyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discussions of online content moderation often focus on the platform, however credit card networks and payment processors determine what content can be monetized and therefore placed on adult platforms. Through fieldwork and interviews among adult industry stakeholders and a survey of adult content creators, this paper demonstrates how these financial actors impose a moral ordering of sexuality that prioritizes credit card brand reputation and optics over the autonomy and integrity of sexual subjects. Visa and Mastercard, via payment processors, suppresses kink content in the name of ensuring consent and safety. This process inappropriately broadens the definition of ‘harmful’ sexual content—what we call ‘definitional creep’—such that private financial entities can effectively create de facto global obscenity law that suits corporate rather than collective interests.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.226 · 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