“Some thought they were ‘in Love’”: Sex, White Teenagehood, and Unmarried Pregnancy in Early Postwar Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the culture of postwar heterosexuality as it impacted (mainly) white girls who were teens between 1945 and the early 1960s. It explores the prevalence of, and changing opportunities for teenage sex, the issue of sexual desire, and the nature of girls’ partners and relationships. Based on this exploration, it argues that opportunities for teen sex were expanding, that girls’ partners were more often other teens, and because of this and the age-consciousness of the times, that marriage was being questioned as the appropriate solution when pregnancy occurred. More broadly, this study challenges the (now aging) stereotype of the conservative “Fifties,” especially the notion of this period as a sexually conservative one. As such, it also helps to connect (rather than to contrast) the 1950s with the decade that followed. Finally, it makes the case for an expanded notion of sexual “revolution,” one which unfolded over several decades of the twentieth century. In early postwar years, this was a revolution of behaviour only for unlike “the Sixties,” there was little public acceptance or open avowal of pre-marital sex.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".