Gender, Class, and Public Drinking in Britain during the First World War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although respectable upper-working-class and lower-middle-class women in Britain began patronizing pubs in unprecedented numbers during World War I, women did not achieve full equality in public drinking places before World War II. Women in pubs provoked intense opposition from authorities, but attracting women's business was a major incentive for brewers to reform public houses. Unreformed slum pubs, unregenerate regional subcultures, uncooperative magistrates, and unsympathetic feminists all prevented the full attainment of equality in public drinking in the interwar years. (English) Pendant la première guerre mondiale, les femmes respectables de la classe ouvrière supérieure et de la classe moyenne inférieure qui avaient évité de consommer de l'alcool en public pendant près d'un siècle, se sont mises à fréquenter les pubs en nombre sans précédent. En menaçant le statu quo entre les hommes et les femmes, elles ont provoqué une opposition intense de la part des autorités, qui semblaient déterminées à contre-attaquer une fois la guerre terminée. L'espoir d'attirer la clientèle féminine a fortement incité les brasseurs à se prononcer en faveur de la réforme des établissements ouverts au public, pour qu'ainsi une tendance apparue pendant la guerre devienne une tradition, une fois les troubles terminés. Pourtant, des pubs non réformés des quartiers pauvres, des sous-cultures régionales ancrées dans le passé, des magistrats récalcitrants et des féministes manquant de compassion ont empêché d'atteimtre l'égalité complète en ce qui concerne la consommation d'alcool en public pendant l'entre-deux-guerres. (French) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Social History / Histoire Sociale is the property of University of Ottawa Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Author-supplied Abstracts.)
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".