‘Learning what real work…means’:: Ambiguous attitudes towards employment in the Girl’s Own Paper
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Under Charles Peters’s editorship until his death in 1907, the Girl’s Own Paper (GOP, 1880–1956) reflected and responded to its readers’ needs for practical information about employment opportunities. Articles such as “On Earning One’s Living,” “Female Clerks and Book-Keepers,” and “Nursing as a Profession” all appeared in the magazine’s first year. The correspondence sections likewise discussed issues of employment. For example, in response to her letter, “Isolated Hetty” is asked whether her elderly relatives would be inconvenienced by her seeking employment and, if not, she is advised “to apply to some hospital for nursing” and directed towards other numbers of the GOP, where “much has been said about” 1 nursing as a profession. Alongside these informational articles and advice columns were fictional stories depicting working girls in their struggles to support themselves and their families while also remaining virtuous and pure. Despite this overt support for working girls, however, the popular Girl’s Own Paper contains a curious ambivalence towards girls’ employment. Although it was ostensibly targeted towards working- and lower middle-class girls, most of whom would have worked, the GOP reinforces a traditional feminine ideal discouraging middle-class girls from working outside the home, while also reaffirming the necessity for working-class girls to earn income through paid labour. The magazine presents middle-class girls’ employment as admirable and acceptable only when such work is inspired by necessity and only when it remains within the bounds of respectable femininity. This idea of girls’ employment is complicated by the GOP’s fiction, which attempts to contain working girls by portraying them as victims of circumstance with few opportunities to express themselves. The freedoms of employment emerge most obviously in the frequent first-person evidence in the correspondence
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle