Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides a review of the anthology Out in the Field: Reflections of Lesbian and Gay Anthropologists (Lewin and Leap 1996a). In discussing their experiences as gay men and lesbians involved in anthropological work, the contributors to this volume address issues of identity management, ethical dilemmas, questions of representation, and the implications that their sexual identity has on the way they conduct fieldwork, particularly on how they relate to their subjects. The authors argue that lesbian and gay anthropologists have a different subject position, a different perspective on their work, and different ways of practicing anthropology than their heterosexual colleagues. The focus of this paper is an examination and critique of these claims and the politics of identity on which they are based. I argue that this politics is based on a problematic understanding of identity that remains trapped within a binary construction of sexual identity and uncritically applies labels such as 'gay' or 'lesbian' to people who do not understand themselves in these terms. Its emphasis on sameness obscures significant differences between researchers and researched and avoids dealing with questions of power in research. I conclude with a brief outline of a 'queer' commentary on such lesbian and gay identity politics and its failure to provide an effective critique of heterosexism and normative identity constructions.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".