MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085222389 · doi:10.1177/0896920508098656

Black Aesthetics and Panther Rhetoric: A Critical Decoding of Black Masculinity in The Black Panther, 1967—80

2009· article· en· W2085222389 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthew W. Hughey

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Sociology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRace, History, and American Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsMasculinityRhetorical questionRhetoricSociologyCONTESTBlack PowerGender studiesPower (physics)Black feminismAestheticsBlack womenArtPoliticsLiteraturePhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article provides a critical decoding of black masculine representations in the Black Panther Party newspaper — The Black Panther. Through a random sample of 100 issues inclusive of 1316 articles from 1967 to 1980, the analysis focuses on both the aesthetic and rhetorical devices that construct black masculinity. These depictions do not turn on agendas to install `positive' images in order to contest `negative' ones, but are concerned with a recuperation of power and self-determinism to reframe the terms of debate over those representations. Findings challenge earlier assumptions that black nationalist (and specifically Black Panther) conceptions of black masculinity were predicated solely on essentialized, fixed, and patriarchal identities, and posit that these representations yielded a fluid and socially constructed notion of a black self founded upon a resistive politic.

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)0.003
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.025
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical SociologySame topicRace, History, and American SocietyFrench-language works237,207