Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Throughout pop culture drag has been represented as effeminate, comic relief, and a radical expression of identity (Too Wong Foo (1995), Priscilla (1994), Mrs. Doubtfire (1993)). Documentaries on queer culture (Paris is Burning (1991), Tongues Untied (1989)) echo these depictions. But if drag queens have distinct identities from the men beneath their makeup, where are the gender borderlands? If drag permits a gender escape, where does the 'man' end and the 'persona' begin? In the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered) civil rights social movement, drag queens are dissidents who perform resistance through gender-bending. SIGNIFICANCE Men in Heels (50m22s) documents these borderlands, contrasting characters' drag identities and one-on- one interviews during the dragging process using mirrors and a voyeuristic lens. Including New York City activism, nightlife, fetish/kink, humor, and abstraction, the film joins the discussion on the exploration of gender identity in modern America. Personal narratives provide an ethnographic and emotional gravitas missing in many pop cultural representations of drag. CONTRIBUTION Men in Heels has screened in New York (Metropolitan, Excelsior), Vilnius, Lithuania (Baltic Pride), and Vietnam, including the US Embassy and La Cinemathèque (Hanoi) for National Coming Out Day, the first Hanoi International Queer Film Festival (HIQFF), and Viet Pride in Ho Chi Minh City (Spade Studio). A shorter version of the film (9m47s) has been licensed to OUT TV / Proudvision (Canada & Europe), an international LGBT WebTV network, to reach audiences in countries with LGBT restrictions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.021 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".