Bibliographic record
Abstract
Homosexuality has historically been constructed as an issue within Ireland and the Irish diaspora for centuries. However, the academic investigation of homosexuality and, consequently, homophobia’s roles in Irish history have been sparsely studied. This essay seeks to examine homosexuality in the Irish diaspora. Specifically, it investigates how heterosexuality necessarily came to be closely associated with the growing Irish nationalist movement in late nineteenth and early twentieth-century England. Through the analysis of Oscar Wilde’s court cases as well as the impact of the publishing of Roger Casement’s personal diary entries, it is evident that homosexuality was constructed as a controversial issue in the Irish diaspora during times of instability in Ireland. Because homosexuality threatened the sanctity of Irish nationhood by existing outside of outlined social norms, instances of publicized homosexuality amid elite Irish men living within the Irish diaspora were largely looked down upon in order to preserve traditional notions of ‘Irishness’. This investigation concluded that familism’s rise in Ireland and throughout the Irish diaspora in response to Britain’s encroaching colonial intervention in the country determined that homosexuality served no purpose to the nationalistic cause, thus leading to its construction as an inherently anti-Irish characteristic among Irish men.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".