{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025911708253358926, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.171597633136095, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Disputes Regarding Meanings of the Homosexual Male Body Characterized as Bear: An Example of Dialogic Analysis

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the dispute around meanings involving the homosexual male body characterized as bear. Based on the theoretical-methodological framework of Dialogic Discourse Analysis, an analysis was carried out of a Facebook group post with three sequences of commentaries on the bear body type. The analysis revealed that the heart of the meaning making dispute in the utterances holds two distinct evaluations: (i) the bear identified as a fat and hairy body, and (ii) the bear identified as a standard body and with (some) body hair. Through the fat/not-fat and hairy/hairless oppositions, the standard gay body contests the bear body characteristics, notably the hair, for demonstrating more masculine traits. However, this position generates protests, almost always in an ironic and critical tone, from those who defend that bears represent the resistance of a category that fits, above all, the fat body.