Notice bibliographique
Résumé
While lesbian, bisexual and queer women characters and storylines have increased significantly in the last decade, fans are often left with tragedy and trauma as their legacy. The term “bury your gays” has been around for decades and refers to the killing of LGBTQ+ characters (usually lesbian or bisexual women) often because they are queer or to advance the story of a cis, straight (usually male) character. Recently a new trope “cancel your gays” has emerged due to new streaming platforms’ business models, which sees shows with queer characters and storylines being cancelled after one or two seasons, again reinforcing audiences’ feelings that queer people are not entitled to endings (let alone happy ones). These tropes are known by most LGBTIQA+ people and some screen studies academics, but not many non-LGBTIQA+ people know of its existence, its history, and its damaging impact on LGBTIQA+ audiences. These issues are explored through this online interactive documentary, Queer Representation Matters (2023). Users can explore the interactive documentary through different pathways including a historical timeline including interviews with academics and creative practitioners that illustrates how these issues and themes have evolved over the last 100 years, and exploring the All Our Lesbians Are Dead! theatrical play that was the catalyst for this work. This project links scholarly theory and creative practice to bring discussions of media representation from the academy into the public sphere in an accessible way. It demonstrates the capacity of participatory digital media to inform and educate a wider audience on important issues of media representation. This project’s objectives included: to provide an historical account of the “bury your gays trope” historical accounts and key moments of queer screen representation; to provide a creative exploration of the effects and impact of trope on LGBTIQA+ people through first-hand accounts from academics and creatives, and; to demonstrate the lasting and damaging impact that the “bury your gays” trope has had on the LGBTIQA+ community, in the hopes of limiting its use in future. This project is guided by theoretical perspectives from the following areas of scholarship: media representation (Millward, Dodd & Fabara-Manuel 2017), digital media (De Kosnik 2012; Hands 2011; Yang 2016), fan studies (Baird Stribling 2013; Ballinger 2014; Guerrero-Pico, Establés & Ventura 2018); and queer fandom (Ng 2017; Ng & Russo 2017; Bridges 2016; 2018; Monaghan 2016). It bases much of its application of interactive documentary practice on Aston and Gaudenzi (2012), Nash (2012), Donald & Galloway (2013) and Aston (2016). The documentary was produced using qualitative research methodologies including semi-structured interviews with screen practitioners (writers and producers) working on LGBTIQA+ themed work, as well as academics researching in the fields of LGBTIQA+ media representation. This project used a digital production design method focused on user-centred design (UCD), emphasising a human-centred design approach which involves user testing at each stage of the project lifecycle.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,019 | 0,015 |
| Communication savante | 0,016 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,108 | 0,015 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».