Reading Gender Relations and Sexuality: Preteens Speak Out.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent research has documented the persistence of unequal gender relations and homophobia in young people’s lives. Feminist post‐structural theories of gender and socio‐cultural theories of learning suggest educators need to understand students’ constructions of gender relations, masculine/feminine desires, and sexuality if they hope to challenge these behaviors. In this article, we examine a diverse group of 47 preteens’ constructions of gender relations, masculine/feminine desires, and sexuality, using a survey, a story from the popular comic Archie, and individual interviews. We found that although participants produced feminist and patriarchal constructions of gender relations, they constructed masculine and feminine sexuality as uniformly heterosexual. Key words: popular culture, feminism, adolescents, discourse analysis Des recherches récentes indiquent la persistance de relations inégales entre les hommes et les femmes et de l’homophobie chez les jeunes. Des théories d’apprentissage poststructuralistes féministes au sujet du genre ainsi que des théories socioculturelles donnent à penser que les pédagogues ont besoin de comprendre les constructions que se font les élèves des relations entre les sexes, des désirs masculins et féminins et de la sexualité s’ils espèrent remettre en question ces comportements. Dans cet article, les auteures analysent, à l’aide d’un sondage, d’une histoire tirée de la bande dessinée Archie et d’entrevues individuelles, un éventail diversifié de 47 constructions que se font des préadolescents des relations entre les sexes, des désirs masculins et féminins et de la sexualité. Elles ont découvert que les participants ont produit des constructions féministes et patriarcales des relations entre les sexes, mais hétérosexuelles de la sexualité masculine et féminine. Mots clés : culture populaire, féminisme, adolescents, analyse des discours
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".