Talk:Londa Schiebinger

Assessment
Most of the content is lists of her written works; therefore "Stub".--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 05:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook1.jpg
Image:Schiebbook1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook2.jpg
Image:Schiebbook2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook3.jpg
Image:Schiebbook3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook4.jpg
Image:Schiebbook4.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook5.jpg
Image:Schiebbook5.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook6.jpg
Image:Schiebbook6.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook7.gif
Image:Schiebbook7.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook8.gif
Image:Schiebbook8.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Schiebbook9.gif
Image:Schiebbook9.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

'Major works' section
I'm removing this to talk as (i) it's unsourced & (ii) it reads like WP:OR. It can be returned to the article (in whole or in part) if/when sources can be found for it. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

'''The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science''' (1989)

analyzes the rise of modern science in Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and the circumstances which led to the exclusion of women. It is significant that between 1650 and 1710, fourteen percent of German astronomers were women; today this figure stands at about eight percent. Schiebinger argues that in regard to women, science is not a neutral culture. In the modern sexual division of labor that crystallized in the eighteenth century, science was part of the terrain that fell to the male sex. Scientists sought to distance themselves from things defined as feminine, including women.

This book explains why and how western societies came to define women’s poor representation in science as failings of female biology rather than resulting from social arrangements and attitudes. Schiebinger tells the story of the first anatomical drawings of the female skeleton. Although drawn from nature with painstaking exactitude, political circumstances drew immediate attention to depictions of the skull as a measure of intelligence and the pelvis as a measure of womanliness. Women’s narrow skulls seemed to vanquish them from the science while their capacious pelvises were thought to destine them for hearth and home.

Nature’s Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science (1993; 2004) goes beyond the analysis of scientific misreadings of women’s bodies (those “skeletons in the closet of science” from the earlier book) to look specifically at the third aspect of her analytic triad, namely, how scientific knowledge is gendered. The question of women engaging in science is not just a question of equality—that all people should have an equal opportunity to pursue careers of their choosing. Nor is it a question of “manpower,” having enough scientists to sharpen a chosen nation's competitive edge. It is a question of knowledge. This book investigates how the politics of participation mold science and human knowledge more generally.

This book explores how gender—both the real relations between the sexes and ideological renderings of those relations—shaped European science in the eighteenth century. Schiebinger’s chapters analyze the sexuality of plants (said to celebrate steamy nuptials on softly perfumed pedaled beds), why mammals are called mammals (the “breasted ones” were to be barred from citizenship, science, and public power), the gendering of apes, and rise of scientific racism and sexism. It is remarkable, for instance, that a secondary sexual characteristic, such as the lushness (or lack) of beards, emerged as one trait sorting males into distinct races. It is shocking that women’s manipulative hands were thought to form racial characteristics—head shape, the contours of lips and noses.

Has Feminism Changed Science? (1999) provides a comprehensive review of the scholarship on women and gender in science. This work presents three sections paralleling Schiebinger’s three levels of analysis: “Women in Science,” “Gender in the Culture of Science,” and “Gender in Substance of Science.”  Schiebinger’s current work (gendered innovations in science and engineering) follows up on her third section that explores how identifying gender in knowledge systems can create better science. She provides exemplary case studies of how removing gender bias can open science to new perspectives, new questions, and new missions. Science, as she has argued, represents our best approximation of truth in a particular time and place. “Truth” and “objectivity” represent lofty goals that require continuous vigilance to attain. These goals are not achieved when systematic prejudices are allowed to continue without challenge. Researchers are best able to approximate truth and objectivity by becoming aware of systematic preconceptions and biases—of which gender has been (and in some quarters continues to be) a powerful one. Gender analysis (in its myriad aspects) becomes one tool among the many that scientists deploy to better understand the universe in all its complexities.

Plants and Empire: Colonial Bioprospecting in the Atlantic World (2004) returns to the eighteenth century and investigates the gender politics of plants. This book explores the movement, mixing, and extinction of botanic knowledge in early modern encounters between Europeans and the peoples of the Caribbean. It discusses how gender relations in Europe and its West Indian colonies guided European naturalists as they selected particular plants and technologies for transport back to Europe. The plant whose history provides the leitmotif of this book, the peacock flower (Poinciana pulcherrima), is not a heroic plant of the historical stature of chocolate, the potato, quinine, coffee, or tea. Nonetheless it was a highly political plant, deployed in the struggle against slavery throughout the eighteenth century by Amerindian and African slave women who used it to abort offspring who would otherwise be born into bondage. The story of the peacock flower is presented as a case study of agnotology—a new approach in the history of science that emphasizes the study of cultural ignorances as a counterweight to more traditional concerns about epistemology. Although abortifacients were highly prized and widely used in the Caribbean, they were not imported into Europe as useful or profitable plants. Trade winds of prevailing opinion impeded knowledge of New World abortifacients from reaching Europe. Here in this bit of history that did not come to pass we find a prime example of culturally cultivated ignorance—the unspoken but distinct configuration of events that converge to leave certain forms of knowledge unplucked from the tree of life.

[End of removed material. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC) ]

Agnotology
i note Londa Schiebinger was AfD'ed, but Robert N. Proctor is un-debated with the same sources and wording. Agnotology indeed. Pohick2 (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)