Gender & Science

Elizabeth Green Musselman (“Dr. GM”)
Fall Semester 2002
Department of History | course # 16-543-01
Feminist Studies Program | course # 04-543-01
Southwestern University
meets: TTh 9:30-10:45 am | Olin 323
 
 
 
 

description

contact

assignments

policies

texts

reading guidelines

schedule

anthology project

reference

description

In this course we will study what the sciences have said historically about women, men, gender, and sexuality. We will also explore the flip-side of that coin: how have preconceived notions about women, men, gender, and sexuality shaped scientific ideas? By using historical examples, we will consider when the sciences have alternately been tools for empowerment and enslavement.
        We will spend roughly the first half of the course discussing the history of gender and Western science. In the second half of the course, we will use our historical knowledge to analyze current issues in gender and science, and feminist approaches to the sciences. Subjects will include: women in the sciences, changing anatomical views of male and female bodies, race as a complicating factor in scientific notions about gender, scientific investigations of homosexuality, the masculinity and femininity and race of scientists, the gendering of nature itself, and science as a kind of power.
        Successful completion of this course fulfills the Values Analysis POK because moral issues lie at the heart of this course. Gender norms and scientific knowledge are two of the most significant tools that modern people use to formulate their values. This course invites and teaches you to think critically about the overlaps and conflicts between those two value systems. The different moral weights placed on femininity and masculinity have had an enormous impact on scientific ideas and practice. Likewise, scientific values such as empiricism and objectivity have enormous moral authority in our culture, and have therefore dramatically shaped how we think about gender. We will assess when and where this authority has been used for good and bad ends.

See me during my office hours for issues that are better discussed face-to-face.
 

office	Mood-Bridwell 216
e-mail	greenmue@southwestern.edu I do not generally check e-mail between 10 am on Friday and 1 pm on Sunday.
telephone	512.863.1595
office hours	M 9:30-11 a.m., Th 2:30-4 p.m.  or by appointment

Return to top

You must complete all of the following assignments. To calculate your final grade, I will multiply each of your assignment grades
by the percentage given for each assignment, and add those numbers together. See the policies section for more information about grading.

1. anthology project (40% total: 25% for drafts + 15% for final project):

For the major assignment in this class, you will become part of the editorial staff for a book I intend to publish called Gender, Science, and Medicine: An Historical Anthology. Your contribution will involve choosing a primary source to work on, selecting 20-25 pages of the book, writing an introduction to the excerpt, inserting explanatory footnotes when necessary, and providing a short bibliography for further reading. My previous Gender and Science students have also participated in this project, and your selections will mix with theirs in the published anthology. Provided that I find a press willing to publish the anthology – which is very likely – I will list each of you as members of the editorial staff on the book’s title page. We will target the anthology for use in other Gender and Science courses. Exciting, no?
       Since this is an unusual and intense assignment, I have structured it carefully. Over the course of the semester, you will hand in your work at various stages. That way, I can give you feedback before you submit your final project at the end of the semester. Part of your grade on the anthology project will come from turning in the drafts along the way. On the drafts I will expect you to work diligently and follow my directions carefully, but I will be somewhat more forgiving of mistakes and omissions. On the final version of the project, I expect you seriously to address critical comments on the earlier drafts and to submit a polished product.
      See the Guide to Compiling your Anthology Project for due dates and detailed information about how to complete each portion of this assignment.

You will write a one-page, focused reading analysis for every two days (one week) of reading. (Since we have readings assigned for twelve of the fifteen weeks of the semester, you will write twelve reading analyses in all.) You do not need to do additional research to write these papers; rather, they are designed to encourage you to think closely about – and to keep up with – our assigned readings.
       You may experiment with the content and form of your reading analyses, but in each of your papers you must make a focused argument about part of one or more of the week’s texts, and support that argument with significant evidence from those texts. (See this excellent web site for help with formulating a thesis.) In other words, I am asking you for your opinions in these papers, but they must be opinions that are informed and well-supported by our assigned texts, not groundless speculations or gut feelings. If you have knowledge from outside the course that seems relevant, please do incorporate it into your reading analyses, but always cite that material appropriately as well.
       A reading analysis is not a summary of the readings. Rather, in your papers you should do one or more of the following: examine the consequences, strengths, and/or weaknesses of an author’s argument; compare the perspectives of two or more authors; discuss an interesting, admirable, appalling, or contradictory aspect of the relationship between gender and science as revealed by our texts; analyze the importance of science and gender ideas to our values. Your papers should be very focused, not off-hand musings or diary entries.
       I encourage you to discuss your ideas about the readings with others – especially with other students in the class and peer consultants at the Debby Ellis Writing Center. However, you must ensure that what you submit as your reading analysis is your own work. In other words, if you borrow an idea from someone else (even an idea given to you in conversation), you must indicate to whom you owe the idea in a footnote. If you do not acknowledge your intellectual debts, you are plagiarizing. In these papers, use MLA style to cite sources.
       I will collect your reading analyses every few weeks and give you feedback and a grade on them. Please attach the previous, graded set of reading analyses to the following set. (For example, when you hand in the second set of reading analyses, attach to it your graded, first set of analyses.)
       I will NOT accept late reading analyses, except in case of a legitimate, documented emergency.
      Criteria for grading this assignment: depth and originality of analysis (do you really try to think carefully about the implications of the readings (good), or do you simply summarize or state the most obvious points about the texts (bad)?); thorough exploration of a focused issue (instead of a disconnected series of unrelated thoughts); ability to synthesize insights from a variety of different texts; careful citation of evidence to support your claims; quality of your writing (including correct spelling and grammar, careful choice of words, prose that is easy to follow).

You will help to lead one of our class discussions of the day’s readings. In the second week of class, you will sign up for a date on which you will help lead the discussion.
       This means bringing in 18 copies of a one-page handout that includes the following:

• the thesis of each of the day’s readings: in your own words and the author’s own clearest expression of that thesis
• 2-3 thoughtful points you would like to make about the readings
• examples of points you might make: how the readings made you rethink one of the readings we have previously discussed; how the readings made you think differently about your own experience with gender issues and/or the sciences; a contradiction in the author’s argument; why a certain point in the readings is pivotal to our understanding of gender and science; how and why you disagree with the approach taken in the readings
• examples of points not to make: that the reading is too long (this does not give us anything productive to discuss); that the author is “thinking about the issue too hard” (in my experience, most people do not think hard enough about what is going on around them)
• 2-3 questions to get discussion going in class: open-ended questions on whose answer reasonable people could disagree, not factual questions

You will briefly (i.e., in no more than 5 minutes) talk through the thesis and your thoughtful points aloud in class. Then, help me moderate discussion by raising the questions on your handout and helping your classmates to further clarify the readings.
      Criteria for grading this assignment: evidence in your handout that you have clearly understood the thesis and complexity of the day’s readings; ability to explain these ideas cogently to the rest of the class, both aloud and in the handout; discussion questions that provoke true discussion among the other students.

Your participation grade will reflect your overall participation in class discussions.
       If it becomes clear that students are not keeping up with the assigned readings, I will also give unannounced quizzes, and your grade(s) on the quiz(zes) will also factor into your participation grade. Unless you have a documented, excused absence, you may not make up missed quizzes.
       Please see an important note about attendance in the policies section below.
      In class on 19 Sep., I will give you an evaluation of your performance in the class thus far.
       Criteria for grading this assignment: frequency of your participation (this includes asking intelligent questions); quality of your comments; your ability to get other students talking by raising questions or debating other students directly; regular and alert attendance; substantive discussions of texts and ideas with me during office hours; quizzes, if necessary.

Return to top

1. attendance: I expect you to attend every class except for those days on which you have a documented academic or athletic trip, medical emergency or other legitimate emergency. Every absence will directly affect your participation grade. However, it will also seriously harm your final grade overall, since you will not have fully synthesized the course material.

2. lateness: Do not arrive late to class. If you are regularly or seriously late, I will ask you to leave. I have this strict policy because lateness is disrespectful not only to me, but also to your fellow students.

3. grading: The maximum percentages awarded for course assignments add up to 100. I use a standard grading scale:
 

If your grades consistently improve over the course of the semester and if your class presence is consistent and attentive, I will consider shifting your final grade up to the next level. For example, if your final course grade worked out to an 86, but your grades had consistently improved during the semester and you were a consistent and attentive class participant, I would consider shifting your final grade up to a B+.

4. late assignments: I will not accept late assignments in this course. If you have a documented medical excuse or other genuine emergency, you may discuss special arrangements with me as long as you do so in a timely fashion. All other late assignments will receive a 0.

5. honor code and plagiarism: You must hand-write and sign the full honor code on each assignment in this class. That means writing out the following full text: I have neither given nor received aid on this assignment, nor have I seen anyone else do so. You may not write P.I.F. or any other variant of the honor code.
       I cannot grade your assignment if you have not written and signed the full pledge. If you cannot sign the honor code in good faith – or if you have any questions about what constitutes an honor violation – please come talk to me.
       On your discussion handout, you only need to write and sign the honor code on the back of my copy, not the copies for the rest of the class.
       On all assignments for this class, you may consult your course materials (including books, notes, student discussion handouts); other scholarly sources (though this is unnecessary for the reading analyses); and the Debby Ellis Writing Center. On all assignments, you may also talk over ideas with others, but you must do the actual research and writing yourself. If you borrow someone else’s idea – even if it’s a fellow student’s idea heard in conversation – cite it appropriately.

6. internet sources: You may not cite internet sources in any of the written assignments in this course. The following do not count as internet sources, and you may cite as many of them as you wish: articles from full-text databases like JSTOR and Project Muse; online primary sources (texts written by historical actors that have been re-published on the web); internet sources that I have approved in advance of your writing the assignment.

7. disabilities: Southwestern University will make reasonable accommodations for persons with documented disabilities. Students should register with the Office of Academic Services, (Mood-Bridwell 311, 863-1286). Professors must be officially notified by the Academic Services Coordinator that documentation is on file at least two weeks before the accommodation is needed.

Return to top

You will find the following at the university bookstore. At your request, I will place copies on reserve in the library.

• Kourany, Janet A. The Gender of Science. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2002.
• Gender and Science Reader (course packet from Longhorn Copies).

Whether you will enjoy and learn a great deal from this class is almost entirely up to you and your commitment to the reading. Thoughtful reading is both active and responsive. As a general rule, thoughtful engagement either (a) uses readings as the basis for formulating interesting discussion questions; (b) uses readings as a basis to probe and develop an interesting positive argument of your own; and/or (c) treats an author/work as another critical mind worth refuting and correcting on points of fact, interpretation, or theory, but also worth praising for creative and well-supported ideas.
        It is not enough, in other words, for you to read merely (or primarily) for comprehension. I fully expect you to engage the many works we will encounter this semester in an active dialogue, and to be prepared to share the fruits of your dialogue with the members of our class at each and every meeting.
        To this end, you might find it useful to keep careful and detailed notes or a journal of your readings in which you pose questions, probe interesting ideas, outline arguments, etc. Such a journal would not only be helpful in preparing for class discussions, but would be an excellent way to record and chart the development of your own dialogue with the authors/works on which we are focusing our critical attention.

Return to top

Each date listed below tells you what topic we will discuss in class, and what you need to have read in preparation for that day’s class.  = date on which a portion of the anthology project is due.  = date on which a set of reading analyses is due. GSR = Gender and Science Reader.

Tu Aug 27: Introduction to the course; syllabus; reading techniques

Th Aug 29: The classical world’s ideas about male and female anatomy
 

read:	Laqueur, “Destiny Is Anatomy” [GSR]
web assignment:	Take the Gender-Science test at University of Washington/Yale University’s Implicit Association Test web site. Once at the site, click on “Measure Your Implicit Attitudes” at left; read disclaimer, and click “I wish to proceed”; then click upper-right button, “Take the Gender-Science IAT”; follow instructions from there. Write down your “score” and bring it with you to class.

Tu Sep 3: The two-sex model
 

read:	Laqueur, “Discovery of the Sexes” [GSR]
other material to prepare:	In class today, you will sign up for a date to help lead discussion. (See assignment description above.) To prepare to sign up, select two or three possible dates/topics that interest you from those that have open “discussion leader” slots in the schedule below.

Th Sep 5: Reproduction
 

read:

1. Tuana, “The Weaker Seed” [GSR] 2. Pinto-Correia, “‘One Does Not See the Wind’” [GSR]

Tu Sep 10: Hysteria
 

read:	1. Tuana, “The Hysteria of Woman” [GSR] 2. Micale, “Hysteria Male/Hysteria Female” [GSR]
due:	anthology project: selection of primary source

Th Sep 12: Hermaphroditism, or ambiguous sex
 

read:	1. Moscucci, “Hermaphroditism and Sex Difference” [GSR] 2. Dreger, “Hermaphrodites in Love: The Truth of the Gonads” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Liz Nix
notice:	primary source assignments handed out in class If you need to order your book through interlibrary loan, do so immediately!!

Tu Sep 17: Hormones
 

read:	Oudshoorn, “The Birth of Sex Hormones” & “The Measuring of Sex Hormones” [GSR]
due:	1st set of reading analyses (three papers covering readings from 29 Aug. through 17 Sep.)

Th Sep 19: Scientific theories about sexuality
 

read:	1. Bullough, “The Development of Sexology in the USA in the Early Twentieth Century” [GSR] 2. Kinsey, et al, “Homosexual Outlet” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Aubrey Buckert
in class:	student progress reports distributed

Tu Sep 24: 18th- and 19th-century theories of race
 

read:	1. Schiebinger, “Theories of Gender and Race” [GSR] 2. Stepan, “Race and Gender: The Role of Analogy in Science” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Jenna Peter, Yesenia Ramirez

Th Sep 26: Eugenics: state population control
 

read:	1. Larson, “Eugenic Seeds” and “Sowing the Seeds” [GSR] 2. U.S. Supreme Court decision on Buck v. Bell (1927) [online reading]
discussion leader:	Haeli Colina, Justin Williams

Tu Oct 1: Retreat from racism in science?
 

read:	1. Stepan and Gilman, “Appropriating the Idioms of Science” [GSR] 2. Boas, “Race and Progress” [online reading] 3. Goodman, “The Problematics of ‘Race’ in Contemporary Biological Anthropology” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Kelley Jo Hubert, Catherine Meshew

Th Oct 3: Anthology workshop
 

prepare for class:

Skim over the primary source which you will be editing for next week. Bring the book with you to class. Carefully read the instructions for the “primary source edited down” section of the Guide to Compiling Your Anthology Project.

Tu Oct 8: Science as a clerical culture
 

read:	Noble, “Revelation in Nature” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Manuel Jovel

Th Oct 10: Craft traditions
We will be meeting in the Prothro Room today.
 

read:	1. Schiebinger, “Women in the Origins of Modern Science” [Kourany] 2. Nagy, “Women’s Role in Stuart Medicine” [GSR]
due:	anthology project: primary source edited down

Tu Oct 15: Class does not meet – have a good fall break!

Th Oct 17: Salonieres and popularizers
Remember: Our class will meet in Olin 323 from now on.
 

read:	1. Findlen, “Science as a Career in Enlightenment Italy” [GSR] 2. Shteir, “Botanical Conversations” and “Women in the Polite Culture of Botany” [GSR]
due:	2nd set of reading analyses (three papers covering readings from 19 Sep. through 10 Oct.) Remember to attach your graded 1st set of reading analyses.

Tu Oct 22: Scientific couples
 

read:	1. Outram, “Before Objectivity” [GSR] 2. Lindsay, “Intimate Inmates” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Kimberly Larson, Coty Maypole

Th Oct 24: Discussion of anthology project
 

due:	anthology project: introduction
recommended lecture:	History Department Annual Colloquium Jean and John Comaroff, University of Chicago “Criminal Justice, Cultural Justice: The Limits of Liberalism and the Pragmatics of Difference in the New South Africa” 4 p.m. Prothro Room (2nd floor of the library)

Tu Oct 29: Women and university science in the 19th century
 

read:	1. Bonner, “Women and the Study of Medicine” [GSR] 2. Kohlstedt, “Maria Mitchell and the Advancement of Women in Science” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Don Lydon, Ellie Portwood

Th Oct 31: Women and men in modern science
 

read:	1. Gornick, “Women in Science: Half In, Half Out” [Kourany] 2. Goldberg, “Creeping Toward Inclusivity in Science” [Kourany] 3. Easlea, “Patriarchy, Scientists, and Nuclear Warriors” [Kourany]
due:	anthology project: bibliography of further readings

Tu Nov 5: African-Americans in science
 

read:	1. Harding, “Women of Third World Descent in the Sciences” [Kourany] 2. Manning, “Ernest Everett Just” [GSR] 3. Warren, “Roger Arliner Young” & “Flemmie Pansey Kittrell” [GSR] 4. Sands, “Never Meant to Survive: A Black Woman’s Journey” [GSR]
discussion leader:	Sarah Kuttesch, Ryan Walker

Th Nov 7: Gender and the practice of social science
 

read:	1. Wylie, “The Engendering of Archaeology: Refiguring Feminist Science Studies” [Kourany] 2. Wilkinson, “Still Seeking Transformation: Feminist Challenges to Psychology” [Kourany]
due:	3rd set of reading analyses (three papers covering readings from 17 Oct. through 7 Nov.) Remember to attach your graded 2nd set of reading analyses.

Tu Nov 12: Gender and intelligence
 

read:	Fausto-Sterling, “A Question of Genius: Are Men Really Smarter Than Women?” [Kourany]
notice:	class meets earlier (9-9:50) today because of fall pre-registration
due:	anthology project: draft [drafts will be traded in class]

Th Nov 14: Gender and evolutionary biology
 

read:	1. Hubbard, “Have Only Men Evolved?” [Kourany] 2. Hrdy, “Empathy, Polyandry, and the Myth of the Coy Female” [Kourany]
discussion leader:	Nicole Kosarek

Tu Nov 19: Gender and cell biology
 

read:	1. Martin, “The Egg and the Sperm” [GSR] 2. Beldecos, et al., “The Importance of Feminist Critique for Contemporary Cell Biology” [Kourany]
discussion leader:	Deidra Schelin

Th Nov 21: Feminist empiricism
 

read:	1. Introduction to part III, pp. 303-309 [Kourany] 2. Longino, “Subjects, Power, and Knowledge” [Kourany] 3. Nelson, “Epistemological Communities” [Kourany]
discussion leader:	Rebecca Monroe

Tu Nov 26: Feminist standpoint theory
 

read:	1. Harding, “‘Strong Objectivity’: A Response to the New Objectivity Question” [Kourany] 2. Ladner, “Introduction to Tomorrow’s Tomorrow: The Black Woman” [Kourany]
due:	anthology project: critique of another student’s draft Bring two copies of your critique.

Th Nov 28: Class does not meet – Happy Thanksgiving!

Tu Dec 3: Feminist postmodernism
 

read:	1. Haraway, “Situated Knowledges” [Kourany] 2. Scheman, “Though This Be Method, Yet There Is Madness in It” [Kourany]
discussion leader:

Th Dec 5: Course wrap-up
 

due:	4th set of reading analyses (three papers covering readings from 12 Nov. through 3 Dec.) Remember to attach your graded 3rd set of reading analyses.
in class:	student evaluations filled out today

Tu Dec 10: Final project due (no class meeting)
 

due:

anthology project: final project DUE by 11:30 a.m. in Dr. GM’s office (MB 216) Remember: either send me your final introduction and bibliography as an e-mail attachment, or submit these files on a disk with your final project. (See the Guide to Compiling your Anthology Project for further instructions.)

Select a primary source for your anthology project from this list. If you discover a primary source that is not on this list that you think would be appropriate, simply discuss it with me. [SU = part of SU library collection. UT = part of UT library collection. ILL = order the book through interlibrary loan.]
 

primary source	location	student
Ajzenberg-Selove, Fay. A Matter of Choices: Memoirs of a Female Physicist. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1994.	SU | 539.7 Aj98m	Sarah Kuttesch
Algarotti, Francesco. Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophy Explain’d for the Use of the Ladies; in Six Dialogues on Light and Colours. Trans. Elizabeth Carter. London: E. Cave, 1739. [A ribald conversation between Algarotti and a fictional lady about Newtonian physics.]	ILL or view copy available at Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center (the wonderful rare books library at UT)
Aristotle. Generation of Animals. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press; London: W. Heinemann, 1979. [Originally published ca. 350 BCE; extremely influential treatise on reproduction.]	SU | 185 Ar46g also available on-line
Barbin, Herculine. Herculine Barbin: Being the Recently Discovered Memoirs of a Nineteenth-Century French Hermaphrodite. New York: Pantheon Books, 1980.	SU | 616.694 B234h	Justin Williams
Beecher, Catherine Esther, and Harriet Beecher Stowe. Principles of Domestic Science. New York and Boston: J.B. Ford, 1869. [What women were supposed to learn about science in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.]	SU | Special Collections	Catherine Meshew
Besant, Annie. Evolution and Occultism. London: The Theosophical Publishing Society; Madras: The Theosophist Office, 1913. [A good selection for those interested in science and religion.]	available on-line	Liz Nix
Blackwell, Elizabeth. Pioneer Work in Opening the Medical Profession to Women; Autobiographical Sketches by Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1895. [Anglo-American Blackwell is usually considered the first female physician of modern times.]	ILL  (SU has recently ordered a copy of this. In the meantime, order it through ILL and then keep checking the SU catalog to see when our copy arrives.)	Kimberly Larson
Blumenbach, Johann Friedrich. On the Natural Varieties of Mankind. (Original publication: 1775). New York: Bergman Publishers, 1969. [Famous discussion of gender and race.]	SU | 599.9 B625a (Included in The Anthropological Treatises of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach.)	Jenna Peter
Buckley, Arabella B. The Fairy-Land of Science. Montreal: C. W. Coates; Toronto: W. Briggs, 1898. [A well-known children’s book in its day.]	available on-line	Deidra Schelin
Cavendish, Margaret. The Atomic Poems. 1653. [Cavendish was one of the few women in 17th-century England to write prolifically in the physical sciences.]	available on-line	Kelley Jo Hubert
Clarke, Edward H. Sex in Education; or, a Fair Chance for Girls. Boston: J. R. Osgood, 1874.	SU Special Collections | 371.822 C551s	Yesenia Ramirez
Conway, Anne, The Principles of the Most Ancient and Modern Philosophy. London, 1692 [Conway, like Cavendish (see above), was one of the rare women in 17th-century physical science.] Include a few letters from: The Conway Letters: The Correspondence of Anne, Viscountess Conway, Henry More, and Their Friends, 1642-1684. Edited by Marjorie Hope Nicolson. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.	Principles: SU | 192 C76p or available on-line; Conway Letters through ILL
Darwin, Erasmus. The Loves of the Plants. In The Botanic Garden. 1789. Any edition is fine. [Darwin’s grandfather’s racy poems about plant sex.] Include some excerpts from: Polwhele, Richard. The Unsex’d Females. London: Cadell and Davies,1798. [Polwhele’s poem is a critique of Darwin’s.]	Darwin: SU | 508 D259b; Polwhele available on-line
Exner, Max Joseph. Problems and Principles of Sex Education: A Study of 948 College Men. New York: Association Press, 1915.	UT | 176 EX65P
Fontenelle, M. de (Bernard Le Bovier). Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. [Originally published in 1719 and intended for female readers, this book discusses the possibility of life on other planets.]	SU | 574.999 F737e	Haeli  Colina
Galen. Selected Works. Edited by P. N. Singer. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. [Galen, a Greek physician who lived from 129-216 CE, had a profound influence on subsequent European medical ideas, including those about women.]	available on-line (SU also has recently ordered a copy of this.)
Geddes, Patrick, and J. Arthur Thomson. The Evolution of Sex. London: W. Scott; New York: Scribner, 1897.	SU Special Collections | 571.8 G267e
Herschel, Caroline. Memoir and Correspondence of Caroline Herschel, ed. Mrs. John Herschel. New York, 1874. [Herschel worked closely with her famous brother, William, who discovered the planet Uranus.] Include all of or excerpts from: Mitchell, Maria. “Maria Mitchell’s Reminiscences of the Herschels.” Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine 38 (1889): 903-909.	Herschel: ILL;  Mitchell: see me for a copy
Horney, Karen. Choose one:  The Neurotic Personality of Our Time. New York: W.W. Norton, 1937. [UT | 616.8 H784N] New Ways in Psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton, 1939. [UT | 131 H784N] [Originally a Freudian disciple, Horney eventually and famously disagreed with Freud’s view of women’s psychology.]	SU | 137 H784n (Neurotic Personality) SU | 131.34 H784n (New Ways)	Manuel Jovel
Kindersley, Jemima. Letters from the Island of Teneriffe, Brazil, the Cape of Good Hope, and the East Indies. London: J. Nourse, 1777.	ILL
Krafft-Ebing, Richard von. Psychopathia Sexualis: A Medico-Forensic Study. Stuttgart: Enke, 1886. [Any edition is fine.]	SU | 155.3 K855p	Ryan Walker
Marcet, Jane. Conversations on Chymistry. Also sometimes listed as Conversations on Chemistry. 1806. [Any edition is fine; Marcet’s Conversations is one of the best-known scientific popularizations in history. Her last name is pronounced <mar-SETT>.]	SU Special Collections | 540 C769	Nicole Kosarek
Mitchell, Maria. Maria Mitchell: Life, Letters, and Journals. Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1896. [Mitchell was the most famous female American astronomer of the 19th century.]	SU | 520.924 M694m	Ellie Portwood
Montessori, Maria. The Montessori Method: Scientific Pedagogy as Applied to Child Education. Translated by Anne E. George. 2nd ed. New York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1912.	SU | 372 M76.5m or available on-line	Aubrey Buckert
Mosher, Clelia Duel, James MaHood, and Kristine Wenburg. The Mosher Survey: Sexual Attitudes of 45 Victorian Women. New York: Arno Press, 1980. [The surveys were collected during the last few decades of the nineteenth century, but not published until 1974.]	UT | HQ 29 M67 1980
Nightingale, Florence. Notes on Nursing: What It Is, and What It Is Not. 1st American ed. New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1860.	available on-line (SU also has recently ordered a copy of this.)	Don Lydon
Nihell, Elizabeth. A Treatise on the Art of Midwifery. London: A. Morley, 1760.	available on-line	Rebecca Monroe
Pancoast, Seth. Boyhood’s Perils, and Manhood’s Curse: A Handbook for the Father, Mother, Son, and Daughter. Philadelphia: Keystone, 1890. [On sex and biology.]	SU Special Collections | 612.6 P192b -- J/G
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Letters on the Elements of Botany; Addressed to a Lady. London: B. White, 1785. [Any edition is fine. Though this famous philosopher was better known for his other works, his letters on botany were profoundly influential for the development of botany as a science for ladies.]	SU Special Collections | 580 R762l
Sharp, Jane. The Midwives Book: Or the Whole Art of Midwifry Discovered. Ed. Elaine Hobby. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. [Originally published in 1671.]	SU | 618.2 Sh23m	Coty Maypole
Somerville, Mary. Preliminary Discourse to the Mechanism of the Heavens. 2nd ed. Edited by Russell McNeil. Nanaimo, B.C. (Canada): Malaspina Great Books, 2001. [Originally published in 1831. Somerville was a respected 19th-century physical scientist. In your excerpt, include about a 15-page section of the Preliminary Discourse, plus several of the critical reviews, either whole or in part.]	available on-line
The Trotula: A Medieval Compendium of Women’s Medicine. Edited and translated by Monica H. Green. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001. [The most influential compendium on women’s medicine in medieval Europe.]	SU | 618.09 T756
Wade, Ira Owen. Studies on Voltaire, with Some Unpublished Papers of Mme. du Chatelet. New York: Russell & Russell, 1967. [Select your 20-25 pages from the section containing du Chatelet’s papers. Du Chatelet is best known as Voltaire’s lover, but she also translated and wrote an important explanation of Newton’s Principia.]	SU | 843.5 V889Z86

Return to top

The following web sites contain useful information for this course:

• Gender, Science, and Technology Bibliography [extensive bibliography of books and articles on gender and science issues, including outside the West]
• Women in Science and Engineering Archive Virtual Exhibits
• 4000 Years of Women in Science [extensive list of short biographies]
• Biographies of Women Mathematicians
• Women in Developmental Biology [several short biographies]
• Women of Science at the Marine Biological Laboratory [exhibit including biographies]
• Contributions of 20th-Century Women to Physics [data on 86 women physicists]
• Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering [links to pages covering current concerns about women and minorities in American science and engineering]
• The Faces of Science: African Americans in the Sciences [includes short biographical entries on prominent African-American scientists, inventors, mathematicians, and medical professionals and a list of first Ph.D.s in various scientific fields]
• Global Reproductive Health Forum [discussion forums on reproductive health and rights]
• Intersex Society of North America [news about, and first-person accounts of, intersexed people—the modern term for hermaphrodites]