MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033981624

Revisiting Asian American Representations in Hollywood: Negotiating Identity, Gender, and Sexuality

2021· article· en· W7033981624 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera: Cerambycidae studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsHollywoodHuman sexualityOrientalismNarrativeNegotiationConstruct (python library)Asian americansIdeologyTransculturation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research paper investigates representations of the Asian diaspora, gender, and sexuality by comparing two films Always Be My Maybe (Khan, 2019) and The Half of It (Wu, 2020), representative of a successful Hollywood trend marked by the 2020 (Parasite, Bong Joon-ho) and 2021 (Minari, Lee Isaac Chung) Oscar wins. The films counter a longstanding history of Orientalist Asian American tropes and stereotypes at a moment when China’s booming economy and domestic markets coincide with more creative directors of Asian origin telling their stories in Hollywood. Through close textual analysis of the two films narratives and comparison of their sequences, I examine how these films construct Asian diasporic identity, gender, and sexuality. The analysis demonstrates how racial identity, never fixed, is constantly in the process of construction shaped by larger social forces that respond to and negotiate dominant ideologies supporting certain stereotypes. In The Half of It race, gender, and sexuality are to a great extent reframed through subtlety and subversive characterization. Always Be My Maybe makes use of Hollywood conventions at least in part to shift the conventional narratives about Asians as it pertains to identity, gender, and sexuality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Same topicColeoptera: Cerambycidae studiesFrench-language works237,207