MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7000549522

‘Fragile Faggotry’: A narrative inquiry into Latinx men experiences with anti-effeminacy stigma

2018· dissertation· en· W7000549522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityNarrativeFemininityMental healthIntersectionalityMeaning (existential)Ethnic groupQualitative researchIdeologyNarrative inquiry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gay men embrace "straight-acting" behaviour to avoid feminine traits.The discourse of "straight-acting" produces and reproduces anti-effeminacy behaviours and homophobia contributing to the likelihood of mental health problems.Research suggests that Latino gay men tend to conform with traditional masculinity ideology when they are strongly involved with their ethnic group, social customs, and traditions.This attitude leads to anti-effeminacy as well as homonegativity.However, literature is still scarce on studies that examine how Brazilian queer men navigate and make meaning of homonegativity and anti-effeminacy stigmas.Therefore, this qualitative study uses interpretive narrative methodology centring the voices of six Brazilian men living in Canada.The findings explore themes of culture, race, and ethnicity, and their intersectionality with gender and sexuality.Thus, it provides an overview of how these men navigate discourses of masculinity and femininity in their daily interactions and implications for promoting healthier relationships and overall mental health among Latinx.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→