MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183410646 · doi:10.1111/amet.13027

Disability, straight time, and the American Dream

2021· article· en· W3183410646 on OpenAlexaff
Zoë H. Wool

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Ethnologist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeteronormativityTemporalityNormativeDreamMilitary serviceSociologyGender studiesQueerAbleismAestheticsPsychoanalysisPsychologyPolitical scienceArtLawEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT In the lives of injured US veterans of the post‐9/11 wars, rehabilitation and heteronormativity are intertwined.Straight timenames the ways these imperatives come together in fantasies of the heteronormative life course. This life course is central to the middle‐class, white‐coded American Dream, in which disability appears only at life's end. Chasing this dream brings many into the US military, but military service often imperils, rather than secures, that dream. Attention to efforts to straighten out life's temporality in the long aftermath of injury reveals a tension between a desire for a heteronormative life course and the experience of living otherwise. As these tensions surface, the cruelty of normative aspirations and their temporal frames become clear. The framework of straight time thus highlights how normative desires are complicated by sometimes‐unexpected attachments to queerness and disability, even in the intensely normative cultural space of the US military. [disability,veterans,heteronormativity,temporality,United States]

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)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.021
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican EthnologistSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207