ABSTRACT
Feminists have argued both for and against increasing research on sex differences. Arguments for such research emphasize the lack of knowledge about factors influencing women's health, while arguments against it emphasize the extent to which such research has been influenced by gender stereotypes. In terms of Helen Longino's taxonomy of patriarchal values, the first argument is motivated by worries about androcentrism, while the second is motivated by worries about sexism. This chapter shows that recent efforts to overcome androcentrism in biomedical research are best characterized with reference to Longino's third patriarchal value, sexual essentialism. Specifically, the US National Institutes of Mental Health has developed a policy, “Sex as a Biological Variable,” that can be traced to, and also reinforces, the view that women and men are fundamentally different. The chapter also suggests that, ultimately, sex essentialism may prove to be as big an impediment to women's health as the androcentrism it has replaced.
Readers may be interested in these Handbook chapters as well: Kristen Intemann, “Feminist Challenges to the Value-Free Ideal of Science”; Abigail Nieves Delgado et al., “The Limits of Diversity in Science: The Case of Human Microbiome Research”; Kristina Rolin, “Standpoint Theory.”
