Popular Pedagogy in Canadian Television: A Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis of Trailer Park Boys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This major research paper studied the representations of masculinity in the Canadian television program Trailer Park Boys from the perspective of public pedagogy and education. Motivated by a desire to expose how patriarchal discourses are learned through everyday practices and texts, a methodology of feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) was formulated. Trailer Park Boys is a long-running mockumentary series set in a fictional trailer park near Halifax, Nova Scotia. It focuses on a cast of male characters with exaggerated personalities, and is satirical in tone. Prior to the main analysis of this paper, a collection of relevant literature was conducted and an opportunity to address a lack of gender-focused studies of Canadian television, including Trailer Park Boys, was noted. This study used the feminist CDA method to analyze what masculinities were reinforced as normal or abnormal in Seasons 3 and 9 of the program, based on the understanding that popular culture is a site of everyday learning. After the data was collected episode-by-episode, it became apparent that the themes of family, authority, and sexuality were helpful in understanding what relationship Trailer Park Boys had with traditional representations of heteronormative masculinity. It was found that despite the presence of some non-traditional forms of masculinity, the show ultimately reproduced stereotypical, and often harmful, discourses of masculinity. A final explanation of the connection between the results of the study and Canadian pedagogy and everyday learning was offered, and directions for future research were identified.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".