MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103913898 · doi:10.11114/ijsss.v1i1.21

Discourses of Masculinity and Femininity in The Hunger Games: "Scarred," "Bloody," and "Stunning"

2013· article· en· W2103913898 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Social Science Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityTrilogyFemininityHegemonic masculinityHeteronormativityGender studiesHegemonySociologyHuman sexualityLiteratureArtPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores how characters in The Hunger Games trilogy are portrayed relative to Connell's gendered discourses of hegemonic masculinity, marginal masculinity, and emphasized femininity. We briefly review the plot of The Hunger Games trilogy and then discuss the ways in which three of the characters are represented with respect to societal gendered discourses, heteronormativity, and the use of violence. We argue that the ways in which these aspects are portrayed relate to the main characters' performance of discourses of hegemonic masculinity (Gale), marginalized masculinity (Peeta), and a complex amalgamation of the two that also draws somewhat on emphasized femininity (Katniss). Finally, we conclude that, while the trilogy could be read as taking a feminist stance with a strong female protagonist, it nonetheless also constrains Katniss in heteronormative ways.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.301 · 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