Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
2000
, p. 7). These scientists considered the skeleton as the most fundamental
element in the human body. Monro, a professor of anatomy, was among the first
to look at a female skeleton. He described female bones as incomplete, thus causing
the female body to be incomplete and deviant, “measured” against the male body
which was
the standard
. According to Schiebinger (
1989
), Thiroux d
Arconville,
another anatomist (and a woman), drew the most “sexist” skeleton of a female
body. The skull of the female skeleton she drew was smaller in proportion to the
body than a male
'
s, the pelvic area was very broad, and the ribs were very narrow.
The “feminine” details in her and other anatomists
'
drawings were “knotted” to
support social ideals of femininity and masculinity. In addition, according to
Trecker (
2001
), evolutionists of the nineteenth century claimed that women
'
s
development had stopped at a lower stage of evolution, because of their sexual
differences. In other words, in the nineteenth century, starting from biological sex
and claiming objectivity, these scientists defined masculinity and femininity and
claimed that these, as well as race, determined social worth (Schiebinger,
1989
;
Trecker,
2001
).
By restricting women
'
s participation in the public sphere, in the seventeenth
through nineteenth centuries, European men (and in some exceptional cases,
European women like Thiroux d
'
Arconville) ensured the “masculinity” of science
fields and made (easy) sexist arguments without the input of women (Schiebinger,
1989
). Doing science was “forbidden” to women and labeled “unfeminine,” thus
pushing women to the “margins” of scientific knowledge (Eisenhart & Finkel,
1998
). Ironically, before science had become the center of social power and
intellectual focus to replace theological and philosophical studies, theology and
philosophy were the disciplines considered “unfeminine” and inappropriate for
women. When science itself was heretical and had a lower prestige compared
with classical knowledge, men encouraged women to be active participants in
science. Women wrote science books, textbooks, and scientific articles for journals.
Midwifery and medicine were among the sciences mainly pursued by women, but
that only lasted until their recognition as scientific professions in the industrial era
(Schiebinger,
1989
; Trecker,
2001
).
An implicit process called the “reproduction of subordinate status” (Eisenhart &
Finkel,
1998
) has served to keep women subordinate to men by means of culturally
encouraging women to value and pursue “feminine” behaviors and fields of study.
Power relations had been preserved. The early ideological constructions and for-
mulations of science originating from ancient prejudices “stated in the most modern
and approved words” (Trecker,
2001
, p. 96) have served as barriers to keep women
away from the science, mathematics, and engineering fields until the present day.
The historical context gave birth to the theorizing of various contemporary
feminist perspectives. Since the first-wave feminist movement (sameness femi-
nism) in the eighteenth century, various feminist perspectives led to the analysis
and different explanations of women
'
s subordinate status. The first-wave feminist
movement was followed by the second (difference feminism) and third waves, each
building on one another and appropriating the previous. All of them were political
'
Search WWH ::
Custom Search