Religious Mediation, Sensational Forms, and Counter-Counterpublics: Films By and For Orthodox Jewish Women Only
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the genre of films being produced by Orthodox Jewish women and intended to be viewed only by other women [i.e., Orthodox Jewish women] as a key form of “sensational" religious materiality and a counter-counterpublic sphere of religious action. Religious materiality is all that makes religious sentiment, knowledge, and practice knowable; it is the “stuff” of religious life and belief. These films present “sensational forms” of religious materiality, or, in other words, experiences that “induce religious modes of sensing, feeling, and making sense that effect the very ‘beyond’ that is posited and form the people addressed as believers” to audiences (Meyer 2015). Focusing on religious films as a key form of and forum for sensational religious materiality moves away from not only a Protestant-style bias focused on the role of interior belief and disregard for “entertainment” media, but also a simple “religion and [+] media” instrumentalist approach. Further, films produced by and for Orthodox Jewish women, while broadly part of the religious counterpublic media of Orthodox Jewry, are further located in a gendered location; the films are thus productively described as located in a counter [read: religious]- counterpublic [read: gendered] sphere of Orthodoxy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".