Yes means yes and no means no? A critical sociolinguistic analysis of cultural assumptions and transnationalism in Polish online sexual education discourses on sexual consent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The subject of sexual consent has received increasing media and academic attention in recent years and the question of its sociolinguistic significance has been investigated in the context of the English language in Canadian, American, and British settings (sources). There seems to be a lack of cross-cultural analyses; however, little research has investigated the complexities of consent as far as attitudes and discourses. This paper presents an analysis of sexual education discourse taken from Polish grassroots sexual education initiatives and looks at the phenomenon of changes in discourse on consent, as well as signs of linguistic imperialism in sexual consent education practices. The project takes a qualitative approach to integrating critical discourse analysis (CDA) and feminist post-structural discourse analysis (FPDA), in which five sources of sexual consent materials found online are analyzed for the linguistic remnants of cultural assumptions about sexuality. This is done to investigate the implied understandings of roles in giving and asking for sexual consent, which at the same time work towards a more progressive discourse on sexuality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".