A Postmodern Argument Against Censorship: Negotiating Gender and Sexual Identity through Canadian Young Adult Novels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resume: D'apres les theories postmodernes, les gens creent leur propre identite en reagissant aux discours culturels qu'ils doivent subir. Les adolescents canadiens etant ainsi sournis a des discours contradictoires sur la sexualite, il devient done imperieux d'etudier en classe des oeuvres qui contrebalancent ces influences parfois discutables. La lecture de romans de bon aloi, sous la gouverne de professeurs attentifs, pennettra done aux jeunes de definir et d'assumer leur identite sexuelle de facon sereine. Summary: Postmodern theories suggest that meaning is never fixed and constant, and that people are continually creating their own identities(their beliefs about themselves, their values, their ways of relating to the world) in interaction with the public and private forms of language which surround them. Canadian teenagers are bombarded by cultural discourses concerning gender, sexuality and violence which may be contradictory, confusing and destructive. Canadian young adult novels studied in school offer alternative discourses which enrich and balance ideas and messages received outside of school. Young people need the freedom to read and study Canadian novels in school in the company of a caring teacher, and in ways which allow them considerable latitude in negotiating and constructing meanings for gender and sexual identity.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".