Women's work, worry and fear: the portrayal of sexuality and sexual health in US magazines for teenage and middle‐aged women, 2000–2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to report on an exploratory content analysis of the portrayal of sexuality, sexual health and disease in select magazines designed for two groups of women: teenagers and women in the 40-50-year-old age category in the USA. The analysis found that magazine portrayal was both similar for the two groups of women and distinctly different. Neither group of magazines focused on women's sexual desire. Both kinds of magazines emphasized that it was women's work and worry to control sexual expression. Teenagers were described as responsible for avoiding sex in order to prevent pregnancy, fearsomely described STIs and untrustworthy male sexual partners. Abstinence was presented as the only viable option for young women. Women in the 40-50-year-old age group were portrayed as responsible for the emotion work and sexual relations linked to their responsibility for maintaining their marriages and fulfilling their tasks of motherhood, especially through the monitoring of the sexuality of their female children. Sex was characterized in terms akin to women's work within the home. Possible explanations for, and consequences of, these presentations of sexuality are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".