Boys being boys: Eco-Double consciousness, splash violence, and environmental education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article shares three vignettes, drawn from the life experience of its authors and five years of research at two schools, to illustrate the “choice” many males are forced to make between normalized “masculine” indifference and a stigmatized caring relationship with the natural world. We suggest this dissociation results, for some, in a kind of eco-double consciousness. The first vignette draws on memories from a male author encountering typical threats of violence for continuing to “proclaim” care for forested places. The second describes a cis male child who at the age of eight dubs himself “eco-boy,” but by 10, is resigned to hiding his ethic of care in order to fit in with other boys. The last vignette examines an instance between two six-year-old cis boys, a female researcher, and several ants. We suggest shirking from the significance of these commonplace experiences with the adage “boys will be boys” is an excusatory move and that educators ought to be aware and address gendered expressions of power, violence, and care at a young age when the necessity for an eco-double consciousness first emerges. The conclusion emphasizes the need for educators to trouble masculine norms by finding ways to respond to the normalization of ecological violence, to keep open the possibility of developing eco-care in young males, and to trouble the notion of “boys being boys.”
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it