Corsets, Headpieces, and Tape: An Ethnography of Gendered Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drag queens co-construct their identities in order to become part of one segment of the gay community referred to as the drag queen community. We argue that to act in the identity of a drag queen is to maximize the contrast with ascribed gender identity and minimize the distortion thereof. We adapted Tajifel and Turner’s (1979) Social Identity Theory to provide us with the necessary framework, but we built upon Goffman’s dramaturgical metaphor and Carbaugh’s ideas on social identification. We conducted several interviews with the different performers before and after the drag shows over several weeks. As part of our findings, in order for the drag queens to communicatively create their group identity, there is a certain degree of behavior and attitude conformity. There is an importance placed upon the likeness or dependence/reliance on one another (i.e. a sense of community), and last, there is internalization of these behaviors, exerted both individually and collectively. This helps to solidify their sense of community and belonging through ritualistic behaviors and allows the individuals to gain a better understanding of who they are personally and socially through this membership. Key words : Social Identification; Gender Identity; Drag Queen Culture Resume: Les drag queens co-construisent leurs identites pour devenir partie d'un segment de la communaute homosexuelle appelee la communaute des drag queens. Nous affirmons qu'agir dans l'identite de drag queen est de maximiser le contraste avec l'identite de genre attribue et minimiser la distorsion de celle-ci. Nous avons adapte la theorie de l'identite sociale de Tajifel et Turner (1979) afin de nous fournir un cadre necessaire, mais nous avons construit la metaphore dramaturgique de Goffman et les idees sur l'identification sociale de Carbaugh. Nous avons mene plusieurs entretiens avec de differents artistes avant et apres les spectacles sur plusieurs semaines. En tant qu'une partie de nos resultats, nous avons trouve que pour que les drag queens puissent creer leur identite de groupe, il y a un certain degre de comportement et d'attitude de conformite. Il y a une importance accordee a la ressemblance ou la dependance/confiance entre les uns les autres (c'est a dire un sentiment de communaute), et enfin, il y a une internalisation de ces comportements, exerces a la fois individuellement et collectivement. Cela contribue a solidifier leur sentiment de communaute et d'appartenance a travers des comportements rituels et permet aux individus de mieux comprendre qui sont-ils personnellement et socialement par le biais de cette adhesion. Mots-cles: Identification Sociale; Identite de Genre; Culture de Drag Queen
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".