Advertisement

Primatology, Archaeology, and Human Origins

Feminist Interventions
  • Londa Schiebinger
Part of the Innovations in Science Education and Technology book series (ISET, volume 15)

Abstract

Feminism has brought some remarkable changes to the natural seienees. Who just a decade ago eould have predieted that the chief scientist at NASA would be a woman, or that the Seeretary of the Air Foree (now former seeretary) eould be a female professor of engineering from MIT.? Who would have expected to see Science, the nation’s premier science journal, debating whether a female style exists in science, or Marie Curie, once shunned by the prestigious French Académie des Sciences, exhumed and reburied in the Pantheon, the resting place of French heroes like Voltaire, Rousseau, and Victor Hugo?

Keywords

Human Origin Feminist Theory Primate Society Female Professor Historian Ofscience 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Briscoe, Ann. 1984. Scientific sexism: The worid of ehemistry. In Women in the scientifie and engineering professions, ed. Violet Haas and Carolyn Perrueci. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  2. Conkey, Margaret. 1993. Making the connections: Feminist theory and archaeologies of gender. In Women in archaeology: A feminist critique, ed. Hilary du Cros and Laurajane Smith. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  3. -and Janet Spector. 1984. Archaeology and the study of gender. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 7:1–38.Google Scholar
  4. -with Sarah Williams. 1991. Original narratives: The political economy of gender in archaeology. In Gender at the crossroads of knowledge: Feminist anthropology in the post-modern era, ed. Micaela di Leonardo. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Fedigan, Linda. 1986. The changing role of women in models of human evolution. Annual Review of Anthropology 15:25–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. -. 1997. Is primatology a feminist science? In Women in human evolution, ed. Lori Hager. New York: Routiedge.Google Scholar
  7. -and Laurence Fedigan. 1989. Gender and the study of primates. In Gender and anthropology: Critical review for research and teaching, ed. Sandra Morgen. Washington, D.C.: American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
  8. French, Jeffirey. 1994. A demographic analysis of the membership of the American Society of Primatologists. American Anthropologist 96.Google Scholar
  9. Gero, Joan. 1991. Genderlithics: Women’s roles in stone tooi production. In Engendering archaeology. ed. Joan Gero and Margaret Conkey. Oxford: Blackwell, 163–193.Google Scholar
  10. -. 1993. The social world of prehistorie facts. In Women in archeology: A feminist critique, ed. Hilary du Cros and Laurajane Smith. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Australian National University, 31–40.Google Scholar
  11. -. 1995. Excavation bias and the women at home ideology. In Equity issues for women in archeology, ed. Margaret Nelson, Sarah Nelson, and Alison Wylie. Arlington, Va.: American Anthropological Association: Archeological Papers, No. 5:37–42.Google Scholar
  12. Gross, Paul, Norman Levitt. 1994. Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  13. -, Norman Levitt, and Martin Lewis, eds. 1996. The flight from science and reasons. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  14. Haraway, Donna, and Susan Sperling. 1996. Cited by Helen Longino, in Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy. In Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science, ed. Lynn Nelson and Jack Nelson. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  15. Healy, Bernadine. 1995. Science 269 (11 August): 773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hrdy, Sarah, and G. Williams. 1983. Behavioral biology and the doublé Standard. 1983. Social Behavior of Female Vertebrates, ed. Samuel Wasser. New York: Academie Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kelly-Gadol, Joan. 1977. Did women have a renaissance? In Beeoming visible: Women in European history, ed. Renata Bridenthal and Claudia Koonz. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  18. Koertge, Noretta. 1994. Are feminists alienating women from the seienees? The Chronicle of Higher Education (14 September): A80.Google Scholar
  19. Le Gat, Claude. 1765. Traité de Pexistance du fluide des nerfs.… Berlin, plate 1, p. 35.Google Scholar
  20. Ross, Andrew, ed. 1996. Science wars. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rowell, Thelma. 1984. Introduction: Mothers, infants, and adolescents. In Female primates: Studies by women primatologists, ed. Meredith Small. New York: Alan Liss.Google Scholar
  22. Schiebinger, Londa. 1994. Naturels body: Gender in the making of modern science. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  23. Strum, Shirley, and Linda Fedigan. 1999. Theory, method and gender: What changed our views of primate society? In The new physieal anthropology (Advances in Human Evolution Series), ed. Shirley C. Strum, Donald G. Lindburg, and David A. Hamburg. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  24. Wright, Rita. 1991. Women’s labor and pottery production in prehistory. In Engendering Archaeology, ed. Gero and Conkey.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Londa Schiebinger

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations