MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1915171679 · doi:10.18740/s48c85

Compulsory “White” Heterosexuality: The Politics of Racial and Sexual Loyalty.

2009· article· en· W1915171679 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Katerina Deliovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSocialist studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatriarchyGender studiesHeterosexualityHuman sexualitySociologyWhite (mutation)LoyaltyPoliticsSubordination (linguistics)Political scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I argue that compulsory “white” heterosexuality, the highly regulated and ritualized practice of channelling European women’s sexuality toward monogamous unions with men of the same race2, is one of the primary ways they are compelled to perform “white” feminine sexuality. Consistent with gender, ethnic and race expectations, and at times across class divisions, European women are expected to demonstrate their loyalty to whiteness and patriarchy. Animus toward interracial unions, particularly between European women and African men, reveal the hidden heteronormative expectations of compulsory “white” heterosexuality. If European women are perceived to challenge these expectations and are therefore seen as disloyal to whiteness and patriarchy, disciplinary regimes are employed to elicit and even coerce compliance. I do not argue that all European women in interracial unions are actively challenging European patriarchal power. Rather, their actions are perceived as a violation of whiteness regardless of the women’s intention or level of politicized consciousness.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocialist studiesSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207