| While reading "The Importance of Feminist Critique for Contemporary Cell Biology", a couple of naive questions came to mind, which actually stopped me in the middle of the reading. First, why has this society gotten to a point, or always been at a point where a seperate, feminist view is needed...in science? Is it that serious? Second, if the founding fathers of science were founding mothers, would the need for a feminist critique be replaced for a masculinist critique? Along with Women's Studies, I am also taking science classes. Having already learned about reproduction and fertilization processes, I do recall the egg being referred to as patiently waiting for the sperm to make the dangerous journey up the uterus and through the fallopian tube. Perhaps because I had a female teacher, I did not get the version about the sperm being " a hero who survives while others perish, a soldier, a shard of steel, a successful suitor, and the cause of the movement in the egg". I was under the impression that the egg was a very vital part in the reporductions process, while the sperm's only job was to get to the egg; nonetheless that view is still biased, which doesn't make right. I initiatlly wondered how the authors of this article would present their argument for the egg It didn't occur to me that I already knew the answer. The authors of this article made some very valid points, and I truly admire the fact that their goal was not to disregard the work done by the sperm in hopes of uplifting the work done by the egg. Since our society is so set on having "scientific proof" for everything, it was very smart of the authors to provide some scientific basis for their reasoning. After reading this article I decided to take a better look at the things that I learn in my science classes, as well as in life. By doing this, I can provide my own version of a feminist critique toward situations in my life, and hopefully open the minds of people around me. My goal in applying a feminist critique to aspects in my life is not to bash men, but just provide more information as it relates to women in order to create a more objective view. |
Saturday, January 19, 2008
The Importance of Feminist Critique in My Life
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
How did you answer your own questions about the piece?
"why has this society gotten to a point, or always been at a point where a separate, feminist view is needed...in science? Is it that serious? Second, if the founding fathers of science were founding mothers, would the need for a feminist critique be replaced for a masculinist critique?"
Hopefully over the course of the semester we can attempt to answer these. I think before these questions can be addressed there are others that might need to be answered like How did "science" come about and who was a part of creating the field? this might shed some light on your inquiries.
Interesting that male bashing came up in your post. Do you believe that to be a component of feminist analysis?
A feminist critique is crucial to eradication of sexism, masculinist, patriarchal notions of human existence. A feminist critique, in fact, provides the other half of the story that is often left out or frowned upon. A feminist critique is necessary for the re-establishment of holistic thinking not just exercised by feminist, womanist, etc. but by all members of society and especially those who contribute to the academic world.
A feminist view in science, you ponder. Why but of course, who else knows a woman's body better than another woman. That is not to say that men are complete imbeciles or provide partial thinking. I think it is important to think in terms of "what can a feminist critique present or find," not "is a feminist critique needed?" But first that takes the ability to deconstruct all of these negative notions and stereotypes that masks the meaning, essence, and purpose of feminist thinkers.
Then, your second question, "...would there be a need for a masculinist critique." Here again, I think it is important to remember that feminism is not a division between men and women. Feminism presents a critique different than what the mainstream (mainly dominated white patriarchs offer). How would you define a masculinist critique? I think that is an interesting choice of words.
It is interesting that you say you already know the answer, but don't think you think that the the answer is informed by scientific descriptions that rests heavily on the implication of social norms? There is an obvious link between the two concepts. The way in which it is described in the article is bothersome that an egg and sperm would be turned into masculinist and feminist indicators (don't you think?).
I am glad you understand that the research team did not intend to disregard the work of scientists. Rather, they were using a critical eye to present a stance that would otherwise be overlooked or never thought of. I do not think that it has much to do with "scientific proof," but more so generating a focus on the masculine description of fertilization. A description that is printed in biology books everywhere, a description that even you, yourself, read and "knew the answer too." Your knowing was evident that the set social norms of woman and men had already been deeply implanted in your mind. I beg the question, is our way of knowing strictly scientific or is it social reality that influences the innate need for "scientific proof?"
I have become more and more aware of the gender-toned language that is used in almost every field of work, from education to legal work to science and it seems that women and being female is almost always seen as being “weak”; something that is “easy”. Just as scientists like to make the job of a sperm seem so difficult and the job of an egg seem so minute. Must we forget who has the child? Who goes through labor pains for numerous hours? Let’s not forget that women are the only people that can have children, or someone with “female” sex organs.
"My goal in applying a feminist critique to aspects in my life is not to bash men, but just provide more information as it relates to women in order to create a more objective view."
I think that it is interesting how you say your goal is not to bash men, as if that is somehow embedded in the process of applying a feminist critique.Its as if we need to be aware of who we offend in our critiques. Ironically, when misogynistic lyrics are used in music or negative images of women appear in the media or in the article, the offenders never stand up and say I'm not bashing women. I think that when using a critical feminist perspective, you need to hold no punches and realize that what you are saying may offend somebody somewhere.
I understand your apprehension about the feminist critique of science. If I'm understanding correctly it is the adverbs that make the science sexist. Subtly using the words like passive show and perpetuate sexist beliefs.
Even though I am a Women's Studies Major, I do feel that you can find something sexist in everything but isn't that the point of this class, to look at things that are supposedly normal as sexist?
Post a Comment