Klicka på en bild för att gå till Google Book Search.
Laddar... The Mind Has No Sex?: Women in the Origins of Modern Science (1989)av Londa Schiebinger
Ingen/inga Laddar...
Gå med i LibraryThing för att få reda på om du skulle tycka om den här boken. Det finns inga diskussioner på LibraryThing om den här boken. “Modern science, arising outside of and in opposition to the medieval university, was fostered in academies, princely courts, Parisian salons, and the artisanal workshop—that is, in a social landscape expansive enough to include a number of women….In this period it was not at all obvious that women would be excluded from the new institutions of science….Not until…the eighteenth century did scientists…undertake a thorough-going reform of definitions of sexuality; the resulting “theory of sexual complementarity justified purging both women and what came to be defined as the feminine from the public world of science.“ inga recensioner | lägg till en recension
As part of his attempt to secure a place for women in scientific culture, the Cartesian Francois Poullain de la Barre asserted as long ago as 1673 that "the mind has no sex?" In this rich and comprehensive history of women's contributions to the development of early modem science, Londa Schiebinger examines the shifting fortunes of male and female equality in the sphere of the intellect. Schiebinger counters the "great women" mode of history and calls attention to broader developments in scientific culture that have been obscured by time and changing circumstance. She also elucidates a larger issue: how gender structures knowledge and power.It is often assumed that women were automatically excluded from participation in the scientific revolution of early modem Europe, but in fact powerful trends encouraged their involvement. Aristocratic women participated in the learned discourse of the Renaissance court and dominated the informal salons that proliferated in seventeenth-century Paris. In Germany, women of the artisan class pursued research in fields such as astronomy and entomology. These and other women fought to renegotiate gender boundaries within the newly established scientific academies in order to secure their place among the men of science.But for women the promises of the Enlightenment were not to be fulfilled. Scientific and social upheavals not only left women on the sidelines but also brought about what the author calls the "scientific revolution in views of sexual difference?" While many aspects of the scientific revolution are well understood, what has not generally been recognized is that revolution came also from another quarter--the scientific understanding of biological sex and sexual temperament (what we today call gender). Illustrations of female skeletons of the ideal woman--with small skulls and large pelvises--portrayed female nature as a virtue in the private realm of hearth and home, but as a handicap in the world of science. At the same time, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century women witnessed the erosion of their own spheres of influence. Midwifery and medical cookery were gradually subsumed into the newly profess ionalized medical sciences. Scientia, the ancient female personification of science, lost ground to a newer image of the male researcher, efficient and solitary--a development that reflected a deeper intellectual shift. By the late eighteenth century, a self-reinforcing system had emerged that rendered invisible the inequalities women suffered.In reexamining the origins of modem science, Schiebinger unearths a forgotten heritage of women scientists and probes the cultural and historical forces that continue to shape the course of scientific scholarship and knowledge. Inga biblioteksbeskrivningar kunde hittas. |
Pågående diskussionerIngen/ingaPopulära omslag
Google Books — Laddar... GenrerMelvil Decimal System (DDC)500.82Natural sciences and mathematics General Science General Science Culture StudiesKlassifikation enligt LCBetygMedelbetyg:
Är det här du? |
In seeking to dispel the idea that science was always associated with masculinity, Schiebinger writes, “It would be a mistake the see the exclusion of women from subsequent institutions of science as a foregone conclusion. The landscape was a varied one, rolling with peaks of opportunity and valleys of disappointment. Traditions that to some twentieth-century academicians seemed inevitable had, in fact, been crafted through a process of conflict and negotiation in previous centuries” (pg. 11). Prior to the seventeenth century, women were encouraged to learn a variety of subjects. Schiebinger writes, “Learned discourse was not only a feminine pastime but one favorable to women” (pg. 19). Women fostered that pastime through the salon, a network for discussing scientific ideas without the adversarial nature of publication or the university. In this period, “natural philosophy remained a part of elite literary culture. Noblewomen were able to insinuate themselves into networks of learned men by exchanging patronage or public recognition for tutoring from men of lesser rank but of intellectual stature” (pg. 65). Beyond the salon, Schiebinger argues that certain sciences practiced by women remained under their control during the early scientific revolution.
Through the eighteenth century, the practice of midwifery and herbal medicines largely remained in women’s control. Schibinger describes them as “examples of arts developed by women most often for the benefit of other women” (pg. 104). Eventually, however, even these fell under men’s control. Early attempts to limit midwives’ influence stemmed from an attempt to limit access to birth control, of which they possessed knowledge. Schiebinger writes, “The ascendancy of the male expert had consequences far more serious than symbolic disputes over priority. The replacement of women midwives by male gynecologists changed the development of gynecological practices. Women lost control not only over their own health care, but over definitions of their own minds and bodies as well” (pg. 118).
Images played a key role as well. Schiebinger describes how images portraying Scientia as female acted as a compliment or opposite to the male scientist (pg. 134). This complimentary concept fostered ideas of separate spheres based on biology. Sciebinger writes, “Even in this age [the late eighteenth century] where males and females were considered essentially perfect in their difference, difference was arranged hierarchically” (pg. 191). While Schiebinger does not examine race in her monograph, she does reference it as part of this hierarchy. These hierarchies of difference helped to justify removing women from the scientific world. Schiebinger writes, “The private, caring woman emerged as a foil to the public, rational man. As such, women were thought to have their own part to play in the new democracies – as mother and nurturers” (pg. 217). All of this culminated in the professionalization of science and the privatization of the home, which barred women’s access to science (pg. 245). ( )