MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016142464 · doi:10.3149/jms.1003.373

Male-Male Sexuality in Lesotho: Two Conversations

2002· article· en· W2016142464 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Epprecht

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Men s Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Sexualities and LGBTQ+ Issues
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityGender studiesTourismImmigrationColonialismSociologyWhite (mutation)ReputationPolitical scienceLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lesotho has an assertively heteronormative and “macho” culture. Indeed, Basotho men have long possessed a reputation in southern Africa for being among the fiercest gangsters, toughest workers, and most incorrigible womanizers of all the African peoples of the region. In 1907 an official enquiry into “unnatural vice” at the South African mines exonerated the Basotho of homosexual behavior. Yet by 1941 another report found that the Basotho were not only enthusiastically participating in inkotshane (male-male sexual relationships) but also public cross-dressing and same-sex marriage ceremonies. Given that Lesotho was almost entirely lacking in industrial development and any significant white or Asian immigration and tourism during the colonial era, it makes an interesting test case regarding the “spreadability” of modern homosexual relations in African societies. This article examines the changes to Basotho male sexuality that took place in relation to the migrant labor system. It assesses whether, and why, male-male sexual relations were as “contagious” as some people today fear.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0390.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0060.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations28
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Men s StudiesSame topicAfrican Sexualities and LGBTQ+ IssuesFrench-language works237,207