MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6996864400

Taking Back Her Rights: Bill C-36 and the Legality of Prostitution in Canada

2014· other· en· W6996864400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network) · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminalizationDecriminalizationSupreme courtPrinciple of legalityLegislationSex workGovernment (linguistics)StatuteLegalizationRedress
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides an analysis of the social and legal construction of prostitution in Canada, the decriminalization and abolitionist models, and the design of Bill C-36. On December 20, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Canada's anti-prostitution laws. Stephen Harper's Conservative government was forced to draft new legislation concerning Canada's sex trade. The federal government responded with the criminalization of consumers and procurers of prostitution, and the decriminalization of sex workers through Bill C-36. The concept of women as sexual property for men has a long history in Canada. Prostitution flourished around colonialist infrastructure, often exploiting colonized people, and populations of low socio-economic position. The criminalization of prostitution in the early 20th century was framed as a "social purity" movement, but it was a reaction to social-historical process of industrialization and urbanization. The mass migrations of immigrant and rural populations entering the cities were perceived by the burgeoning urban middle class as a threat to whiteness and femininity as defined by the Victorian nuclear family. Women existing outside of the Victorian paradigm of femininity were pathologized as ruined and debased. The "social purity" model of criminalization defined the legal status of prostitution in Canada for almost a century. The Canada vs Bedford Supreme Court charter challenge successfully argued that the criminalization of prostitution violated sex workers’ constitutional right to security of the person. Sex positive, liberal feminist theorists have argued that the full decriminalization of prostitution will create regulated market conditions where sex work becomes a leisure service that is safely produced and consumed within the modern post-industrial economy. The abolitionist model disputes the decriminalization perspective through an intersectionality of feminist theoretical lenses contending that prostitution is inherently exploitative, misogynist and racist, and must be eradicated from society. Bill C-36 was ostensibly constructed around the abolitionist model, but its progressive intent remains questionable. Canada's shift toward neo-liberalist state policy has resulted in increased border security, and the control and exploitation of global migratory populations. Abolishing the consumption and procurement of sex through legislation places an inordinate amount of faith upon the legitimacy and rationality of the legal system's power. The power relations that produce the sexual exploitation of marginalized people both locally and globally need to change; otherwise, laws such as Bill C-36 will serve only to punish and control, and not to prevent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0350.021
Scholarly communication0.0110.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArca (British Columbia Electronic Library Network)→French-language works237,207→