Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:22:49.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feminist Theory in Science: Working Toward a Practical Transformation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Deboleena Roy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although a rich tradition of feminist critiques of science exists, it is often difficult for feminists who are scientists to bridge these critiques with practical transformations in scientific knowledge production. In this paper, I go beyond the general bases of feminist critiques of science by using feminist theory in science to illustrate how a practical transformation in methodology can change molecular biology based research in the reproductive sciences.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 19 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Feminist Science Studies , Winter 2004 , pp. 255 - 279
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdelmassih, S., Cardoso, J., Abdelmassih, V., Dias, J. A., Abdelmassih, R., and Nagy, Z. P. 2002. Laser‐assisted ICSI: A novel approach to obtain higher oocyte survival and embryo quality rates. Human Reproduction 17(10): 2694–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arendt, Josephine. 1995. Melatonin and the mammalian pineal gland. Cambridge: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Benston, Margaret. 1982. Feminism and the critique of the scientific method. In Feminism in Canada, ed. Miles, Angela and Finn, Geraldine. Montreal: Black Rose.Google Scholar
Birke, Lynda. 1994. Feminism, animals and science: The naming of the shrew. Buckingham, U.K: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Bleier, Ruth. 1986. Sex differences research: Science or belief? In Feminist approaches to science, ed. Bleier, Ruth. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Christiansen‐Ruffman, Linda. 1993. Community base and feminist vision: The essential grounding of science in women's community. Canadian Women's Studies 13(2): 16–20.Google Scholar
Corea, Gena. 1986. The mother machine: Reproductive technologies from artificial insemination to artificial wombs. New York: Harper and Row.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrenreich, Barbara, and English, Deirdre. 1978. For her own good: 150 years of the experts' advice to women. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Eichler, Margrit. 1991. Nonsexist research methods: A practical guide. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eichler, Margrit. 1997. Feminist methodology. Current Sociology 45(2): 9–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausto‐Sterling, Anne. 1985. Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.Google Scholar
Findlay, Ian 2000. Pre‐implantation genetic diagnosis. British Medical Bulletin 56(3): 672–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Franklin, Ursula. 1990. The real world of technology. Concord, Canada: Anansi.Google Scholar
Haraway, D. 1986. Primatology is politics by other means. In Feminist approaches to science, ed. Bleier, Ruth. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1987. Feminism and methodology: Social science issues, ed. Harding, Sandra. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1989. Is there a feminist method? In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1991. Whose science? whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbard, Ruth. 1989. Science, facts, and feminism. In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Hubbard, Ruth. 1995. The logos of life. In Reinventing biology: Respect for life and the creation of knowledge, ed. Birke, Linda and Hubbard, Ruth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1996. Feminism and science. In Feminism and science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, Richard. C. 1991. Biology as ideology: The doctrine of DNA. Concord, Canada: Anansi.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 1989. Can there be a feminist science? In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, Emily. 1987. The woman in the body: A cultural analysis of reproduction. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Messing, Karen, and Mergler, Donna. 1995. “The rat couldn't speak, but we can”: Inhumanity in occupational health research. In Reinventing biology: Respect for life and the creation of knowledge, ed. Birke, Lynda and Hubbard, Ruth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Namenwirth, Marion. 1986. Science seen through a feminist prism. In Feminist approaches to science, ed. Bleier, Ruth. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Rosser, Sue. 1989. Feminist scholarship in the sciences: Where are we now and when can we expect a theoretical breakthrough? In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Roy, Deboleena, Angelini, Nadia, Fujieda, Hiroki, Brown, Greg M., and Belsham, Denise D. 2001. Melatonin‐mediated repression of gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) gene expression and secretion in GnRH neurons. Endocrinology 142(11): 4711–20.Google Scholar
Roy, Deboleena, and Belsham, Denise D. 2002. Melatonin receptor activation regulates gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) gene expression and secretion in GT1–7 GnRH neurons: Signal transduction mechanisms. Journal of Biological Chemistry 277(1): 251–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shiva, Vandana. 1995. Democratizing biology: Reinventing biology from a feminist, ecological, and third world perspective. In Reinventing biology: Respect for life and the creation of knowledge, ed. Birke, Lynda and Hubbard, Ruth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Shiva, Vandana. 1997. Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. Toronto, Canada: Between the Lines.Google Scholar
Spanier, Bonnie. 1995. Im/partial science: Gender ideology in molecular biology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Steele, C. Danae, Wapner, Ronald J., Bruce Smith, J., Haynes, Mark K., Jackson, Laird G. 1996. Prenatal diagnosis using fetal cells isolated from maternal peripheral blood: A review. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 39(4): 801–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuana, Nancy. 1989. The weaker seed: The sexist bias of reproductive theory. In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
van Steirteghem, André, Devroey, Paul, Liebaers, Inge. 2002. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 186(2002): 199–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Voordouw, Bettie C. G., Euser, Robert, Verdonk, René E., Alberda, Bert T., de Jong, Frank H., Drogendijk, Aat C., Fauser, Bart C. J. M., Cohen, Michael. 1992. Melatonin and melatonin‐progestin combinations alter pituitary‐ovarian function in women and can inhibit ovulation. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 74(1): 108–17.Google ScholarPubMed
Yen, Samuel S.C. 1991. Hypothalamic gonadotropin‐releasing hormone: Basic and clinical aspects. In Brain Endocrinology, ed. Motta, Marcella. New York: Raven Press, 245–80.Google Scholar