MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889718516 · doi:10.26153/tsw/43319

Natural, infinite, artistic : demythologizing athletic superability in contemporary American literature

2022· article· en· W6889718516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTexas Digital Library (University of Texas) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyNarrativeMythologyDisability studiesEliteHierarchyDiversity (politics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural, Infinite, Artistic centers a disability studies approach to demythologize contemporary American sports narratives about athletic superability and analyze how particular elite skills are falsely and strategically distanced from disability in line with what disability theorist Tobin Siebers calls the “ideology of ability.” The ideology of ability flattens the complex, contextual, and fluctuating nature of ability into a hierarchy that casts some bodies as superior and “superabled,” like those of elite, nondisabled athletes, in contrast to bodies rendered “disabled” by their conditions and settings. Natural, Infinite, Artistic identifies three myths of athletic superability—that it is natural, infinite, and artistic—and locates the myths in representative texts to analyze how each marginalizes and dehumanizes disability in support of this ideology. In examining the myths, each chapter considers the racialized, gendered, and ableist dimensions of which particular athletes’ abilities have been mythologized. In addition, each chapter identifies a concept—“freakery,” metis, and the cyborg—and shows that, while each concept could unite disability and superability to destabilize the ideology of ability, it is actually used to sever the two and celebrate superability. Demythologizing narratives that glorify superabled athletes upends the way ability is mythologized in particular bodies and undermines ideas about what makes ability (and whose ability) supposedly desirable and superior. While Natural, Infinite, Artistic centers narratives of athletic superability, it does so in service of what disability activist Mia Mingus calls “disability justice.” Disability justice work undermines the ideological system that privileges able-bodiedness and stigmatizes disability while respecting the differences between them. Natural, Infinite, Artistic works toward this conception of disability justice by complicating and combating sports narratives in which the ideology of ability is not only operative, but heightened, with depictions of superabled white, male athletes as unequivocally superlative. Narratives about superability are places where ideas of ability as normal, ideal, and impressive are generated and sustained against ideas of disability as something that is limiting, lamentable, and needing to be overcome. In order to destigmatize disability and upend the ideology of ability, Natural, Infinite, Artistic subverts the belief that possessing natural, infinite, and artistic superabilities is possible and preferable

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0140.037
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTexas Digital Library (University of Texas)Same topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207