“Or whatever you be”: Crossdressing, Sex, and Gender Labour in John Lyly’s <i>Gallathea</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores sociologist Jane Ward’s gender and sexuality theory: the notion of “gender labour,” in which a cisgender (not crossdressed or trans*) partner participates in co-creating his or her partner’s queer gender. While work on gender labour thus far has focused on contemporary subjects, this article demonstrates the ways in which the concept can be generatively applied to an early modern context. The concept is pushed to its extremes in John Lyly’s Gallathea, in which the two genderqueer crossdressers, Gallathea and Phillida, each thinking that the other is male, create and enact romantic love scenes that involve gender play and a co-created divestment from biological sex.
 Cet article examine la théorie du sexe et du genre de la sociologue Jane Ward, en particulier la notion de « négociation du genre » dans laquelle des partenaires cissexuel (ni travesti, ni trans) contribuent à créer l’identité homosexuelle de l’un et de l’autre. Alors que la recherche sur cette « négociation du genre » s’est surtout penchée sur des questions contemporaines, cet article montre comment cette notion peut être appliquée à des contextes relevant des débuts de la modernité. Cette notion est poussée à l’extrême limite dans le Gallathea de John Lyly, pièce dans laquelle deux personnages travestis et homosexuels, Gallathea et Phillida, qui pensent que leur vis-à-vis est un autre homme, créent et réalisent des scènes d’amour entraînant des jeux de genre et une révélation commune de leur sexe biologique.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".