Making 'Opposite-sex Love' in Print: Discourse and Discord in Linglong Women's Pictorial Magazine, 1931-1937
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This is a case study that examines desire and its regulation in the Shanghai magazine publication Linglong of the 1930s. It highlights representational tensions in the construction of heteronormative marriage, a regulatory measure that contained the prospects of female autonomy during a period of flux. The study uses an integrated, or “horizontal,” method of reading, which regards journal issues as collectively authored texts and emphasizes the spatial relation and interplay of printed content. Writings and images are referred to as integral aspects of representation to illustrate the ways in which heteronormativity is covertly challenged at the same time that same-sex love and the rejection of marriage are forcefully stigmatized. A special focus of the analysis is an examination of how the valorization of heterosexual love is matched by vociferous attacks on men and idealizations of female bonds, which are at times valued over relations with men. Insinuations of alternative sensibilities and desires are also highlighted, especially the magazine's celebration of masculine women in images.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".