THE REAPPROPRIATION ATTEMPT BY SLUTWALK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A slew of scantily clad women marching through the streets shouting obscenities like “Slut, slut! Ho, ho! Yes means yes! No means no! ” may seem a little unusual especially if the women are known to hold “respectable ” positions and lead otherwise “respectable ” lives. So what exactly is going on? The first SlutWalk took place in Toronto, Ontario, Canada in 2011, its idea conceived from feminist ideology and ignited by a comment made by Toronto Police officer, Constable Michael Sanguinetti. On January 24, 2011, he told a group of students at an Osgoode Hall Law School personal safety class, “I've been told I'm not supposed to say this. However, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized ” (Pilkington). The SlutWalk was held in response to this misguided statement of victim-blaming in which some blame the victims for their rape because of their attire rather than the rapists for their sexually violent and dehumanizing behavior toward their victims (“WHY”). The SlutWalk served as a protest march against “rape culture ” and its corresponding “slut-shaming ” (sometimes called “slut-bashing”) and 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".