MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894031871 · doi:10.1386/qsmpc.3.1.51_1

‘You’re standing on my neck’: Feminist cynicism and queer anti sociality in MTV’s Daria

2018· article· en· W2894031871 on OpenAlexaff
Robin Alex McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueQueer Studies in Media & Popular Culture · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerFemininityCynicismSociologyPsychoanalysisOptimismGender studiesPoliticsQueer theoryHumanismAestheticsArtPhilosophyPsychologySocial psychologyTheologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract ‘Look right through me / Say I’m gloomy / Yea, so sue me [...] I’ve got to be direct / It’s like a big train wreck / You’re standing on my neck / You’re standing on my neck,’ sing post-grunge band Splendora, throughout the opening sequence to MTV’s popular 1990s cartoon series, Daria. Brooding, sarcastic, and surly, Daria Morgendorffer – a teenager and unapologetic misanthrope from the small, fictional town of Lawndale – has much to offer scholars of feminist negativity and queer anti-social theory. Following Lee Edelman’s rejection of a communitarian, heteronormative ‘politics of hope,’ this article seeks to theorize Daria as an important feminist killjoy and queer cynic; one who vehemently disavows the liberal humanist and capitalist-driven narratives of heroism, optimism, femininity and success that so often saturate teenage television programming. Lauding negativity’s ability to ‘poke holes in the toxic positivity of contemporary thinking’, as Jack Halberstam writes, this article is interested in the kinds of alternative imaginings that are produced by one’s refusal to ‘grow up’ and to ‘fit in’.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.047
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQueer Studies in Media & Popular CultureSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207