MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415573034 · doi:10.1386/infs_00140_7

Glamour: Reflections, refractions and the ghost of the modern woman

2025· article· en· W4415573034 on OpenAlexaff
Kenya Lee Gutteridge

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Fashion Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubjectivitySubject (documents)BetrayalTRACE (psycholinguistics)PremiseOrder (exchange)Perspective (graphical)Ideology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this piece, I set out to trace the contours of postfeminism in my upbringing. Believing it to be constitutive rather than manipulative of neo-liberal subjectivity, I reflect on the figure of the modern woman, from whom rigorous self-discipline and meticulous appearance management is not only expected but also constructed as pleasurable and freely chosen. In keeping with others, I believe she amounts to a sinister obfuscation of the heterosexist logics that subtend modern feminine subjectivities – and the political order itself. However, as I examine her, I realize she is ghosted by the paradoxical feminist potential of subjectivation through self-shattering. The modern woman is a site of self-authorization through citation, a process which undermines the construction of the neo-liberal subject as unitary, free and self-knowing. This undoes the very premise from which she emerges and postfeminism proceeds. While it has traditionally been the feminine’s vulnerability that has rendered it abject, the modern woman is a feminist figuration, a betrayal of the way there is no subjectivity not defined by its mediation through others – by its very objectification. She is a shape-shifting presence whose contours might only be mapped provisionally before she recedes into the surfaces that project her: a glimmer, a glamour.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Fashion StudiesSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207