MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009659219 · doi:10.1177/1363460712454080

Almighty gringos: Masculinity and value in sex tourism

2012· article· en· W2009659219 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Rivers‐Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueSexualities · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityTourismHegemonic masculinityGender studiesSociologyEthnographyContext (archaeology)Value (mathematics)EliteIdentity (music)Embodied cognitionPolitical sciencePoliticsGeographyAnthropologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with sex tourists in San José, Costa Rica, this article explores the connections between masculinity and the production of value in sex tourism. I argue that in the context of increasing opportunities for travel and technological innovations, North American masculine identities have become transnational, including for non-elite men. Sex tourists’ descriptions of their experiences reveal that they are involved in a contradictory search for a masculine identity that is simultaneously progressive and hegemonic, one that relies not only on sex workers but also on a critique of the masculinity of Costa Rican men and other tourists. This article also suggests that sex tourism is best understood as a relational economy, in that the encounters between sex tourists and sex workers produce value that is simultaneously economic, embodied, and emotional, including the possibility of temporarily enhanced social status.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.015
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexualitiesSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207