Venturesome women: Nineteenth-century British women travel writers and sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation analyzes the travel writings of Isabella Bird Bishop, Mary Kingsley, Florence Douglas Dixie, and Isabel Savory. While away from England, these women writers participated in cultural exchanges which led to reevaluations of British womanhood. British women travel writers operated not only within the power structures of gender but also within the structures of empire, class, and race. Women travel writers blazed the trail for the New Woman of the end of the century. Before cycling and cigarette smoking were allowed, daring women such as Isabella Bird Bishop and Mary Kingsley crisscrossed the globe in defiance of patriarchal tradition and in search of their own pleasure --- later both hallmarks of the New Woman. Contrary to conservative hopes, women travel writers increased in popularity, inspired young women to be daring and challenged the Victorian status quo by writing of the dangerous pleasures they experienced while abroad. As inspiration for the New Women, women travel writers reveled in danger and athletics, and in time, reshaped England's image of womanhood. Because of the positive accounts of athleticism provided by women travelers, female health became a prominent topic in society. By the early twentieth century, women had increased access and acceptability to physical pursuits.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".