MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399657029 · doi:10.1093/ahr/rhae041

Stephen Vider. <i>The Queerness of Home: Gender, Sexuality, and the Politics of Domesticity after World War II</i>.

2024· article· en· W4399657029 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heather Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityPoliticsGender studiesWorld War IIQueerSociologyArtPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stephen Vider’s lively, creative, and impressively researched book, The Queerness of Home: Gender, Sexuality, and the Politics of Domesticity after World War II, offers a truly capacious meaning of domesticity, illuminating the place of the home within LGBTQ history and tracing a history of “domestic citizenship.” In so doing, he unfolds a “private counterhistory of LGBTQ politics” that ran alongside “more public forms of LGBTQ social and political activism,” not to mention a “queer counterhistory of American domesticity” (26). And he challenges both queer historians and theorists alike to think beyond a conflation of domesticity and homonormativity. Vider goes well beyond white middle-class domesticity and the nuclear family, though debates surrounding gay marriage are something of an animating force in the book. He begins with a chapter on the early postwar impetus toward gay marriage, showing how even terms like “husband” and “wife” could be taken up with a “wink of camp humor, playing with rather than reproducing the gendered scripts of heterosexual marriage” (34).

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)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.008

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207