MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392985961 · doi:10.3138/ecf.36.2.233

Eighteenth-Century Proud Boys; or, Why Sir Charles Grandison is (a) No Wanker

2024· article· en· W4392985961 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rachel Gevlin

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature: history, themes, analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article links Samuel Richardson’s final novel Sir Charles Grandison (1753) to the twenty-first-century Proud Boys in order to examine seriously the implications of two often overlooked aspects of both: Grandison’s virginity and the Proud Boys’ “No Wanks” policy. This policy, which limits members’ masturbation, can serve to elucidate the sexual politics of Grandison, as both the modern-day men’s rights group and the eighteenth-century novel valorize male sexual restraint as a form of domestic dominance. This article argues that Grandison’s idealization of male sexual restraint reinforces the portrait of male virility for which Richardson’s earlier novels were criticized, rendering the virile male protagonist palatable to readers of the domestic novel’s courtship plot. The valorization of restraint exhibited by Richardson’s hero and the Proud Boys advances a sublimated understanding of male virility that works to solidify the fiction of sexual essentialism that still permeates our culture today.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century FictionSame topicLiterature: history, themes, analysisFrench-language works237,207