Wendy, Peter and the Lost Boys—The Gendered Discourses of Welfare Service Practitioners and Their Young Clients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the discourses related to gender in interviews with welfare service practitioners and their young, 18- to 29-year-old clients using ‘boy discourse’ as an analytical framework and J. M. Barrie’s story of Peter Pan as a metaphorical framework. Those beyond the reach of the welfare services are referred to by the practitioners as ‘lost young people’. Some practitioners see young men in particular as poor creatures, unable to achieve anything without a girlfriend, whose task is to get these Peter Pans ‘on the right track’ as Wendy does. The ‘Lost Girls’ are in a similar position to the ‘Lost Boys’ but the practitioners are more concerned about the boys. Their assumption is that girls can cope but boys need Wendys in order to succeed in life. As a result, the combined efforts of the female staff and nurturing girlfriends are seen as instrumental in steering ‘failing boys’ towards adulthood.
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 | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".