MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022616533 · doi:10.1080/21504857.2020.1757477

Busting Loose: Ms. Marvel and post-rape trauma in X-Men comics

2020· article· en· W3022616533 on OpenAlexaff
J. Andrew Deman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Graphic Novels & Comics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsSt. Jerome's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePornographyUncannyPsycheComicsCharacter (mathematics)LiteratureArtPsychoanalysisPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conspicuous absence of trauma in superhero narratives is an established trope. In Avengers #200, the character Carol Danvers (aka Ms. Marvel) was subjected to a sexual assault that was characterised as non-violent, non-traumatic and even as an act of love. Chris Claremont, who had written the Carol Danvers character years prior, objected to this treatment of the character and recontextualized Carol’s assault as rape in Avengers Annual #10. A large part of this recontextualization involved the portrayal of long-term psychological trauma in Carol’s life. This symbolic thread carries into Uncanny X-men #236, titled ‘Busting Loose’ (also by Claremont), where the superheroine Rogue temporarily loses her superpowers and is then subjected to an off-panel sexual assault. Her response is to turn her consciousness over to Ms. Marvel (whose psyche now shares Rogue’s body). The story that unfolds from there draws upon the historical symbolism of Ms. Marvel and advances the recontextualization of Carol Danvers by portraying a post-traumatic dissociation followed by a reclamation of power and agency through community and disclosure, allowing the Carol character to redress, to some degree, the problematic historical excision of trauma from superhero narratives that deal with sexual violence.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.015
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Graphic Novels & ComicsSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207