MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609614729 · doi:10.29173/mruhr362

From Courtship to “Occasional Prostitution”: Acceptable and Unacceptable Public Displays of Sexuality in Canada from 1880 to 1920

2017· article· en· W2609614729 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Melissa L. Bauman

Bibliographic record

VenueMount Royal Undergraduate Humanities Review (MRUHR) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityCourtshipMoralityReputationHeterosexualitySociologyGender studiesPeriod (music)UrbanizationPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawAestheticsArtEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the sexual regulation and the social construction of sexual norms for men and women in the period of 1880 to 1920 in Canada. At this time, sexuality was closely tied with reputation, character, and morality, which required strict regulation of behaviour. With the growth of urban centers, social norms were tested, resulting in what I call an "early dating culture," which was mistaken as "occasional prostitution." I argue that as “proper” societal norms were tested by the effects of urbanization, there emerged an early dating culture that challenged notions of morality in relation to acceptable and unacceptable public displays of heterosexuality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMount Royal Undergraduate Humanities Review (MRUHR)Same topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207