Play Ball: Representations of Women on Vintage Baseball Photo Postcards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Play BallRepresentations of Women on Vintage Baseball Photo Postcards Cathy Leogrande (bio) and Brian Sheehy (bio) Much has been written about the depictions of baseball on various print materials of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. From game programs to early tobacco and trade cards, baseball action and players were depicted in drawings and photographs. Among items produced between 1905 to 1915 were suggestive and comic photo postcards depicting men and women in baseball uniforms posed in romantic scenes with suggestive captions using baseball terminology. These cards were produced at a time when societal norms and gender roles were changing. This article describes some of the themes that emerge from a closer analysis of the postcards given the historical context within which they were produced, sold, and collected. Baseball was becoming a common love for men and women in the early twentieth century. Using baseball in these postcards seemed to diffuse the polarization of changing gender norms through humor. Some of the cards could be viewed as supportive of that change while other cards used humor to mock or demean the ever-changing gender landscape. Baseball provided a common language that could be used metaphorically to illustrate those changes in a gentler and more humorous way. The following descriptions of these items documents the conflicting perceptions of women and the sport itself. Analysis of these littleknown baseball artifacts provides a glimpse into the beginnings of changes in perceptions of men, women, and their relationships at the beginning of the twentieth century. early twentieth century: the new woman looks and acts differently The turn of the century was a time in which society in all aspects of life, both in Europe and America, was changing. The Victorian Age in England had ended with Queen Victoria's death in 1901, and societal norms were evolving. [End Page 163] Everything from clothing styles to acceptable behavior had already begun to shift as the Edwardian age began. The role of women was one of the areas that saw the most radical changes. From traditional demure wives and daughters who remained at home pursuing activities such as gardening and needlework, women were now less interested in marriage and raising a family and more open to education and employment. Three areas of reform provide context for examining the baseball postcards described here. First, women became independent and were able to act as they chose rather than as society expected. Sanctions that previously kept many young women mired in tradition were less effective in maintaining females who were demure and quiet out of fear of scandal. Second, clothing changed dramatically as women began working and taking part in athletic leisure activities. Third, American attitudes toward sex began to change through education and other efforts such as the social hygiene movement. The effects of these three reform movements are all observable in the baseball postcards published in the early twentieth century. In 1894, Sarah Grand used the term "New Woman" in describing how men, along with society as a whole, would benefit from an active, thinking woman.1 The New Woman was generally perceived to be young, single by choice, and one who supported herself by working. She practiced emancipated behaviors such as smoking and traveling unescorted on public transportation.2 At the same time suffragettes were beginning the fight for voting rights, many women began seeking greater opportunities outside their homes and outside the control of their fathers or husbands. Some viewed this change as positive, proposing that an independent woman who thought and acted for herself would make the world a better place. Others saw this as a disaster in the making as mannish, child-hating females degraded the social order and caused irreparable harm to all. Despite these divergent perspectives, the New Woman was here to stay and, admired or despised, she remained a force for change.3 New ideas were mirrored in appearance and behavior. Women were no longer "exquisite slaves," constantly reminded that their morals needed to be as tight as their corsets.4 Dressing differently was a symbol of the new possibilities to think and act differently. Fashion became more functional. Looser-fitting clothing that provided ease of movement as...
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) | 0.237 | 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".