Darem meer as moffies? Stereotipering in die voorstelling van homoseksueles en homoseksualiteit in die Afrikaanse jeugliteratuur : geesteswetenskappe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
hierdie artikel word daar op vergelykende wyse aangetoon watter stereotipes in die voorstelling van homoseksueles en homoseksualiteit in die Afrikaanse jeugliteratuur onderskei kan word, asook hoe hierdie stereotipes deur middel van kognitief-narratologiese prosesse bydra om heteronormatiwiteit te bevraagteken, of die bevraagtekening daarvan juis teen te werk. In die artikel word elf Afrikaanse jeugromans geidentifiseer waarin gay karakters voorkom, naamlik: Tyd van herkenning (1984) en Klaprose teen die wind (1992) deur Marzanne Leroux-Van der Boon; Barrie Hough se Vlerkdans (1992), Skilpoppe (2000) en Breek (saam met Lizz Meiring 2002); Francois Bloemhof se Slinger-slinger (1997) en Nie vir kinders nie (2005); Jackie Nagtegaal se Daar's vis in die punch (2002); Marita van der Vyver se Die ongelooflike avonture van Hanna Hoekom (2002); Derick van der Walt se Lien se lankstaanskoene (2008); en Uit (2014) deur Fanie Viljoen. In ooreenstemming met internasionale tendense is daar ook in Afrikaanse jeugverhale 'n opvallende verskuiwing van narratiewe afstand ten opsigte van gay karakters, asook 'n toenemend kleiner fokus op die sogenaamde nature/nurture-debat. Stereotiepe binere opposisies tussen hetero en gay karakters, daarenteen, bly sterk aanwesig. Hierdie stereotiepe teenstelling blyk onder meer uit die sterk mate van verwyfdheid van gay karakters in die meer onlangse jeugliteratuur, maar ook deurdat die gay karakter gereduseer word tot lusobjek. 'n Besonder opvallende tendens is die byna volkome afwesigheid van lesbierkarakters in die Afrikaanse jeugliteratuur, wat die indruk versterk dat die tipe literatuur gendergebonde is. Die verhouding tussen homoseksualiteit en Christenskap blyk ook (nog altyd) buitengewoon gekompliseerd te wees binne die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks. Ten spyte daarvan dat Suid-Afrika die enigste land op die Afrika-kontinent is waarin die regte van homoseksuele deur die Grondwet beskerm word en diskriminasie op grond van seksuele orientasie strafbaar is, huiwer die Algemene Sinode van die NG Kerk om duidelik standpunt in te neem oor hoe welkom gay lidmate is; word lesbiers in sommige gemeenskappe gemolesteer en selfs doodgemaak, en word daar steeds talle gevalle van xenofobie in die media vermeld. Die gevolgtrekking van hierdie artikel is dat dit op hierdie stadium byna onmoontlik is vir Afrikaanssprekende Suid-Afrikaanse tieners om in hulle eie taal 'n positiewe jeugroman oor homoseksualiteit in die hande te kry waarin heteronormatiwiteit teengewerk of ten minste bevraagteken word. More than merely moffies : stereotyping in the representation of homosexuals and homosexuality in youth literature In the first issue of the literary journal Guillotine Carney (2012) argues in an article titled In search of the gay youth novel in Afrikaans that there is a seemingly never-ending drought within literature in the area of gay youth novels, and that it has become high time that an voice resounded to offer young readers in unprejudiced gay youth literature. According to Carney it is usually the case in that gay characters in youth novels are rare and stereotypical. After a synoptic analysis of six youth novels Carney comes to the conclusion that the stereotype of gay people that emanate from literature is that they are either flamboyant or die tragically. Due to its exploratory nature and conciseness - it is in fact only two pages long - Carney's article is far from comprehensive. His article could, for instance, have been supplemented and expanded with regard to both the number of gay novels that he mentions and the detail in which they are discussed. The aim of the investigation on which this article is based was precisely to fill this gap by showing in a comparative manner which stereotypes can be distinguished in the representation of homosexuality (and especially homosexual characters) in youth literature, as well as how these stereotypes contribute by way of cognitive-narratological processes to a questioning of heteronormativity, or to counter the questioning.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".