MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411610379 · doi:10.1080/14616742.2025.2510496

Sisters, friends, strangers: queering the political discourse of love

2025· article· en· W4411610379 on OpenAlexaff
Ting Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Feminist Journal of Politics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsSociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article studies the political discourse of sisterhood within #MeToo and other social movements in China, Hong Kong, and transnational Sinophone communities. The current People’s Republic of China regime has emphasized a new conception of love that associates notions of family, obedience, and social stability with Confucianism and “traditional cultures,” aided by new gendered narratives of nationalism in the cybersphere. The discourse of motherly love promulgated by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government’s former Chief Executive Carrie Lam during the 2019–2020 mass protests further demonstrates the impact of such parental governance in post-handover Hong Kong. In response, a non-familial, multi-layered notion of sisterhood, termed queering love, has emerged from grassroots feminism that challenges the state’s political discourse of love in parental governance and patriarchal nationalism with social and queer solidarities. Such queering and transnational alliances beyond and across national boundaries further confront the authoritarian claim to a singularity of identity and the authoritarian monopolization of love, providing emotional reparation and new dialogues for societies undergoing change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Feminist Journal of PoliticsSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207