“Worlds. . .[of] Contingent Possibilities”: Genderqueer and Trans Adolescents Reading Fan Fiction
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
Cultural studies scholars have long been interested in the nexus between people's online activities and their identities. One activity that has drawn attention is reading/writing fan fiction (fictions written by and for fans that build upon the characters and worlds depicted in commercial texts). While fan fiction and its surrounding communities have long been understood as resistant to heteronormativity, previous work exploring the fans who produce and consume fan fiction has largely insisted that most of these fans are adult ciswomen. Little has been written about the experiences of trans and genderqueer fans. To remedy this elision, this article explores two trans and genderqueer individuals' experiences with fan fiction. It closely examines the roles reading, and especially reading fan fiction, has or has not played in their understandings of themselves, their identities, and their places in the world.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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