Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Essay on Losing Direction Annette Leibing"Tenho tão nítido o Brasil que pode ser, e há de ser, que me dói o Brasil que é." "I am so clear about the Brazil that can be, and that should be, that the Brazil that is hurts me." (attributed to anthropologist and politician Darcy Ribeiro )The starting point for this essay is my impression that there is a general tendency -a directionality -in masculinity studies.This is, of course, a simplification of an increasingly diversified field.Yet an example for a common underlying narrative could be the title of feminist journalist Liz Plank's recent book For the Love of Men (2019), and the sub-title she chose, From Toxic to a More Mindful Masculinity.Here, what I call directionality starts with a narrative of insufficiency.The detected male 'defect', in such tales, needs to be pushed towards an improved masculinity in a future, in which men, through a reflexive act of conscientization, ideally accept other types of gender and themselves as equal in rights and, at the same time, improve their way of living gender.But what if this desired evolutive and emancipatory idea -from bad to better, from traditional to moderngets turned around or even loses direction? 1 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuelle_%C3%9Cbergriffe_in_der_Silvesternacht_2015 2 On "Male citizenship" in so-called Western societies, see Dudink, Hagemann and Clark (2012).3Here 'reverse anthropology' comes to mind.This approach developed by Roy Wagner (2016 [1975]), means a radical change of perspective and, after Viveiros de Castro (2013: 477), "the art of determining the problems posed by each culture, not of finding solutions for the problems posed by our own".'Reversion' in this essay is, first of all, the general feeling of fought-for value systems getting lost, and its consequences.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".