MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199700946 · doi:10.3983/twc.2021.1893

Zankie, queerbaiting, and performative rhetorics of bisexuality

2021· article· en· W3199700946 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransformative Works and Cultures · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeteronormativityPerformative utteranceRhetoricQueerNarrativeContext (archaeology)ConversationSociologyScrutinyLesbianIdentity (music)AestheticsGender studiesSubversionMedia studiesArtLiteratureHistoryLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyPoliticsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2014, two contestants on Big Brother (CBS), Frankie Grande and Zach Rance, began a showmance (ship name: Zankie). The presence of two men in a showmance, only one of whom was openly queer before filming, created ample conversation among fans and contestants about Rance's sexual orientation, as he seemed to be undergoing a personal bi-awakening narrative on live TV. The rhetorics of reality TV paint this both as a sincere struggle and as a joking game strategy, which occasions an overdetermined scrutiny of whether Rance is really bisexual or if he is queerbaiting the audience. Rance's performance of self on the show relies on queerbaiting, but he also deploys rhetoric surrounding bisexuality that allows him to participate in a same-sex showmance while still claiming heterosexuality outside the context of the show. His contradictory articulations of identity and desire reinforce stereotypes about bisexuals while also calling into question the heteronormative assumptions behind the showmance label.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.325
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