Masculinity in Male‐Dominated Occupations: How Teams, Time, and Tasks Shape Masculinity Contests
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
Abstract We conduct a comparative case analysis of men in three male‐dominated occupations—firefighting, consulting, and business executives—to examine enactments of “masculinity contests,” which include aggressive, competitive struggles for dominance and expectations to prioritize work ahead of other life commitments. We find that these contests are neither inevitable nor experienced uniformly in male‐dominated occupations. Rather, our analysis shows that such contests are shaped and curtailed by three occupational features: the structure and organization of teams within the occupation, the temporal structure of work in the occupation, and the tasks that are core to the occupation's work. Our analysis advances current perspectives on masculinity and work by offering insight into how occupational features interact with social class to shape expectations of appropriate masculine behavior. We find some instances in which teams, time, and tasks operate distinctively by social class and other instances in which these features act similarly, across social class lines, to reduce or exacerbate the salience of masculinity contests.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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