Rapport à la littérature érotique et enjeux de respectabilité pour les femmes : une étude de discours publicitaires et prescriptifs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this article is to study the discourses on sexuality and gender at work in the prescriptions of erotic reading within the "women's press". By analyzing the legitimization of this reading and the recommendation of its use in several French speaking women's magazines, we wish to show that this testifies to the reconfiguration of norms within sexuality, but also that these "reading recommendations" participate in a discursive production on gender that is operative. After having updated the reasons for the proliferation of erotic reading prescriptions in the women's press, this article will situate these cultural exhortations with regard to the construction of sexuality as an enterprise of the self. Then, this article will turn to studying the discursive mechanisms of the promotion of this reading, which seems in particular to guarantee a certain respectability to the female readers. Finally, it will be shown how these exhortations trace the contours of the good erotic subject, understood within a female sexuality perceived as intrinsically different.
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 | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".