The Concerns Underlying Sex Education for Young People in France During the First Half of the 20th Century: Morality, demography and public health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
n France during the first half of the 20th century, the issue of sex education for young people of both sexes was the focus of debate among actors in various fields. Their aims converged, however, in the guiding principles they proposed for action to regulate sexual behaviour. In this essay, we would like to demonstrate that sex education, as it was proposed and introduced, was based on a set of proposals or choices reflecting an overall representation of the demographic stakes involved and a framework for their interpretation. Fuelled by fear of the “venereal peril ” as well as degeneration and depopulation, sex education consisted of a set of prescriptions and recommendations to help young men gauge the consequences of sexual intercourse for themselves, their families and society. It sought to instil a sense of responsibility by preparing them for a family model that would ensure reproduction of the population in the desired quantity and quality. The representation of these demographic concerns and the framework for interpreting them determined the guidelines for sex education: they set limits on what was desirable and undesirable in the area of sex education as well as its objectives. Other concerns have already been brought out, not only in the case of France but more broadly in Europe and the United States or Canada: morality, in particular, imposed or ruled out some of the prescriptions1. By focusing our attention on these underlying concerns, we will
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".