MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3037705258 · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14108

It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's...a Girl?!: Analyzing Representations of Femininity on The CW's Supergirl

2020· dissertation· en· W3037705258 on OpenAlexaff
Dylan Freitag

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemininitySnapshot (computer storage)GirlClubReputationGender studiesRepresentation (politics)AestheticsArtSociologyPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although it takes more than diverse media representation to create positive social change, representation is still an important part of normalizing identities and pushing discussions of social issues.However, representations of certain minority groups, whether on the basis of racial, ethnic, sexual, or gender identities, are often largely absent in media, and flawed when they do exist.This is true of comic books and the various forms of media that have adapted superhero stories.For instance, superhero tales have long been dominated by depictions of superheroes who are heterosexual cisgender men.Because of this trend spanning from the 1930s into the 21 st century, superhero stories have developed a reputation of being a boy's club rife with sexism.Certainly, this issue persists to this day, but this thesis provides a snapshot of how women are fairing in superhero media in the mid-to-late 2010s.By focusing specifically on the case study of the CW's Supergirl, I discuss how representations of superwomen have improved greatly compared to popular expectations and no longer entirely reflect a singular and problematic ideal of what being a woman means.In particular, my examination is centered around three of Supergirl's main women: protagonist Kara Danvers/Supergirl, Kara's sister and super spy Alex Danvers, and the heroic Nia Nal/Dreamer.By doing an in-depth analysis of how femininity is represented through these three women, I argue that the show presents complex and nuanced depictions of femininity that are a strong step forward for the genre.

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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Feminism, and Media→French-language works237,207→