MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988438902 · doi:10.1386/csmf_00007_1

The negotiation of masculinity and identity through clothing choices among Russian speakers in Canada

2019· article· en· W2988438902 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alla Myzelev

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies in Men’s Fashion · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityNegotiationIdentity (music)Hegemonic masculinityGender studiesSociologyClothingHegemonyImmigrationPolitical scienceAestheticsPoliticsLawSocial scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using information interviews conducted with Russian-speaking men living in Toronto and vicinity this article interrogates the understanding of fashion among immigrants from former Soviet Union and Russia. Using a hypothesis that Russian-speaking men conceptualize their male identity differently from both their Canadian counterparts and Russian men living in Russia this article investigates how fashion choices affect negotiation of identity of these men in Canada. Using art historical methodologies, historical analysis and qualitative research I look at the interviewee’s contributions as a reflection of masculinity in transitions assuming that the forming of masculine identity is a constantly changing process. In each society the hegemonic model of masculinity categorizes groups of men in relation to each other through ‘normalizing’ the definition of masculinity and defining its standards and proper manifestations. This is particularly true of societies where the military culture has an increased presence and an important role to play. Contemporary Russia epitomizes the commanding and rigid nature of the masculinist regime where hegemonic masculinity is firmly established and thoroughly institutionalized.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Studies in Men’s FashionSame topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207