Sentirsi bene, sentirsi bella: emozioni e contraddizioni nell’esperienza femminile della bellezza
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Is beauty exterior, situated on the body surface? Or does it glow from the inside, intertwined with body functions, emotions, and the mind? Such questions are crucial to understand how, when, and why women feel beautiful, as well as their involvement in beautification practices. Feminine beauty has been historically defined by the opposition between surface – i.e. vanity, deceit, futility – and depth – i.e. authenticity, purity, truthfulness. This traditional opposition is still present in contemporary Western discourses on beauty and wellness. If beauty glows from the inside, it must nevertheless be visible on the outside. This paper discusses emotions, worries, and experiences of women who commit to “feeling good” and “feeling beautiful”. Data gathered during interviews with Canadian women are analyzed with regard to the tension between surface and depth; and to the relation between beauty and wellness. The paper discusses social conditions of positive and negative emotions linked to beautiful appearance as a placeholder for moral rectitude, self-control, and health.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it