Gender Perspective on Affective Dimensions of Chemistry Learning - Affective Dimensions in Chemistry Education - page 73

physiological states, and vicarious experiences had an important contribution to
girls self-efficacy in these fields. Britner draws attention to the sources of self-

efficacy that are important for girls. Social persuasion, or “the verbal and nonverbal
judgments provided by others” (p. 4), Britner argues, is a key factor for self-efficacy
in life sciences for girls, most likely because these fields have traditionally attracted
more women than men in both education and workforce. Life sciences are viewed
by most societal actors as more appropriate for girls than for boys, a tendency that
could be better understood when approached by a feminist theory lens.

'

3.1 Historical Accounts, Essentialist and Existentialist
Feminism

Of the many feminist theories, essentialist feminism focuses on gender differences
based on biology (Rosser, 1997 ). Gender differences are expressed in terms of
visuospatial and verbal ability, aggression and other behavior, and other physical
and mental traits based on prenatal or pubertal hormone exposure. These difference
claims are likely to have originated from the work of the eighteenth- and
nineteenth-century sexist scientists, who in turn were inspired by a tradition of
ancient thought. The following is a short review of historical accounts leading to
women s subordinate status that has been sustained over many centuries.

According to ancient scientists, “temperament (sexual or otherwise)” was deter-
mined by four elements (called humors), which at the same time were the four
fundamental elements composing the universe: air (which is dry), water (which is
wet), fire (which is hot), and earth (which is cold). In Aristotelian/Galenic view,
women lacked heat compared to men; therefore, they were not able to expel their
reproductive organs, as men had done. Since hot and dry things were considered as
superior to those cold and wet, women were thought as “incomplete/imperfect”
men. In later years, going against Aristotle, Descartes indicated that reason, or the
ability to use logic, was the same in all humans. For that reason, he was considered
as a defender of women. According to Descartes, the only difference between sexes
was their reproductive organs. Mind and body were separate; thus, the difference in
the body would not generate a difference in the mind, or the reasoning capability
(Schiebinger, 1989 ).
In the late eighteenth century, sexual differences were no longer seen as
remaining only in the reproductive organs. By the 1790s, European anatomists—
almost all white men—pointed to the differences between female and male body,
arguing that men were distinct in their physical and intellectual strength and women
were distinct in their motherhood skills. However, this difference was not solely a
difference; it was also arranged hierarchically, in favor of men.
The anatomists of the eighteenth century looked at the female and male skele-
tons to justify their theses; in other words, “scientific theories of difference were
used to justify women

'

s exclusion from higher education and public life” (Weedon,

'