MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401582789 · doi:10.1515/humor-2023-0099

Ellie Tomsett: <i>Stand-up Comedy and Contemporary Feminisms: Sexism, Stereotypes and Structural Inequalities</i>

2024· article· en· W4401582789 on OpenAlexaff
Madison Trusolino

Bibliographic record

VenueHumor - International Journal of Humor Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmotional Labor in Professions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComedyGender studiesPoliticsFeminismContext (archaeology)SociologyWhite (mutation)HarassmentIntersectionalityFace (sociological concept)Inclusion (mineral)AssertionMedia studiesPolitical scienceLawSocial scienceLiteratureHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stand-Up Comedy and Contemporary Feminisms: Sexism, Stereotypes and StructuralInequalities is an in-depth look at women and feminism in stand-up comedy in the United Kingdom.The book takes an intersectional feminist approach to the study of comedy and importantly, states that this approach is inclusive of all women.In a political climate that is increasingly hostile towards transgender women, author Ellie Tomsett's assertion is, sadly, a welcome and necessary one.But, as Tomsett is the first to admit, women in the UK comedy scene are still primarily cisgender and white.Because of this, the inclusion of a diversity of voices can sometimes be limited.Again, this is something the book acknowledges and actively tries to correct as evidenced in Chapter 4's discussion of the additional harassment that women of color face online (misogynoir) and the ableism of comedy venues.From discussing the historical roots of comedy in the UK to the rise of alt-right, incel, and TERF culture, this book argues that to fully explore feminism and comedy, it is important to address the political, economic, and social context in which it arises and operates within.Stand-Up Comedy and Contemporary Feminisms does an excellent job of unpacking the implications of policies and practices that, while on the surface may not appear to be gendered, have a great impact on the lived experiences of women in comedy.For example, while the lack of funding for individual comedians in the UK might appear like a gender-neutral problem, Tomsett illustrates how it disproportionately impacts women who are already marginalized in the industry.Tomsett's dedication to women in comedy is apparent in every aspect of the book including its methodology.As Tomsett argues, comedy research still tends to "foreground analysis of the content and performance style of comedy" (p.3), without considering how comedy is created and the ways audience receive it.While Tomsett analyzes women's comedy routines (both feminist and postfeminist), she also includes rich information collected from her time as a participant-observer at the UK Women in Comedy festival, interviews with both comedians and comedy audience members, and even presents her own forms of policy-driven activism.Tomsett's use of multiple methodologies lends a personal richness to the text that demonstrates a deep-felt trust between researcher and research-participants.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueHumor - International Journal of Humor ResearchSame topicEmotional Labor in ProfessionsFrench-language works237,207