MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401818918 · doi:10.1386/jptv_00125_1

‘It’s the hope that kills you’: Challenging cisheteropatriarchal possibilities of romance, friendship and care in Ted Lasso

2024· article· en· W4401818918 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha Thompson, Julian Barr

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Popular Television · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFriendshipRomanceLasso (programming language)PsychoanalysisPsychologySociologyMedicineSocial psychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leading up to the Ted Lasso (2020–23) series finale in May 2023, fans anticipated whether various white, heterosexual romantic relationships on the show would come to fruition. When the finale finally aired, there was considerable disappointment at the lack of romantic conclusions for their characters, rather than satisfaction in the friendships that were developed over the show’s three seasons. Yet, queer and feminist theorizations of friendship position friendship as central to the human experience and valuable in analysing the social impacts of cisheteropatriarchal norms. In our analysis of social media posts, we employ feminist queer analysis to critically examine the interplay between the show’s portrayal of friendship and fans’ reactions to these plotlines that were shaped by cisheteronormative imaginaries of what types of relationships we should expect in television while the show defied romantic comedy tropes to focus on friendship. We argue that the romance-focused fan reactions obstructed the full spectrum of possible relationships, platonic and romantic, that were developed throughout the show’s run. When taken together, these relationships deepen our understanding of the ways that Ted Lasso can be taken as an illustration of the importance of friendship and care in our everyday lives, which should be treated with the same gravity as romantic relationships in popular culture.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.334
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Popular TelevisionSame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207