MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916801034 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2011v36n4a2419

Cutting, Driving, Digging, and Harvesting: Re-masculinizing the Working-Class Heroic

2012· article· en· W1916801034 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Augie Fleras, Shane M. Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeHegemonic masculinityWorking classDiggingMasculinityHegemonyGender studiesIdeologySociologyBlue collarClass (philosophy)AestheticsHistoryLiteraturePolitical scienceArtPoliticsLawEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Television portrayals of working-class males in blue-collar jobs have in the past proven unflattering at best, demeaning at worst. But a new breed of unscripted TV shows articulates a fundamentally different narrative about the unsung heroism of working-class men. This article explores the narratives and images associated with the re-masculinization of blue-collared working-class males as real men in contrast to conventional working-class misrepresentations as persons lacking self control, motivation and commitment. This genre of “macho” male programs constitutes a key ideological tool by which “hegemonic” narratives of conventional masculinity are internalized through the “pleasures of the media.” The authors conclude that, despite the recent valorization of blue-collar values, contributions, and identities, representational distortions and content omissions persist in portraying working-class realities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207