“What condition will not miserable men accept?”: Hegemonic Masculinity in John Lyly’s Galatea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies of gender in John Lyly’s pastoral comedy Galatea (1592) have primarily focused on the queer potential of the female-to-male (FTM) crossdressing plot. While the critical focus on same-sex love and gender fluidity in the play has been evocative, it has understated the importance of hegemonic masculinity and biological gender determinism in the play. Neptune, Tityrus, and Melibeus, for example, reveal that their ways of being male are actually in competition with each other, quite inflexible, and closely monitored by the other men in the play. Moreover, while Phillida and Galatea become queer when they fall in love with each other, they begin the story with a view of gender as natural and immutable; they come to see gender as mutable only after Venus offers to perform the “unpossible” (5.3.154) to turn one of them into a man. This article will use R. W. Connell’s theory of hegemonic masculinity to argue that Neptune represents a rigid formation of hegemonic masculinity, and that Melibeus and Tityrus represent an ascendant form of hegemonic masculinity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".