Fun with Dick and Dick: Homosociality on r/MassiveCock
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social media and content-sharing platforms provide new opportunities for the circulation of not only professional and amateur porn productions but also “pornographic self-representation”. This study examines the interactions that occur when male pornographic self-representation is shared in an inclusive space that welcomes both straight and gay men to post dick pics and gaze/comment on them. Focusing on the Reddit forum, Massive Cock, we conducted a discourse analysis of a selection of posts, comments and account profiles collected over a seven-month period. Based on our findings, we contend that Massive is a homosocial space where homoerotic dick gazing reaffirms and disrupts the heterosexual–homosexual binary. Our findings point to an uneven dynamic in which the majority of the posters perform a straight identity, whereas the majority of commenters perform a gay identity. Their comments serve to disrupt hegemonic masculinity and, in turn, create a space that welcomes mostly straight and bi-curious performances of masculinity. Such performances are possible due to recent cultural shift away from homo-hysteria and towards a more inclusive heteromasculinity. Collectively these performances produce an inclusive “fraternity of the cock”, but it is one which maintains a heterocentric focus and function.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it