Gender in Science

              As a student of nursing my focus is on western medical science.  We are taught about evidence based practice where to justify our actions (or inaction) high quality research should inform.  There is even a hierarchy of what is considered good evidence.  The evidence pyramid shows that as you move up, the amount of evidence lessens but the accuracy increases.

Many high-quality studies use double blind randomized controlled variables and in health care gender variables are always at the forefront in considering study designs.  As I am learning gender is not simply binary in terms of male and female but can be fluid, fixed, or can change from one identity to another.  Joan Scotts’ article “Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis”, opened my eyes on how we categorize gender (1986).  I feel it important to clarify her definition of gender:

What is Gender?

Scott defines gender having two parts and several subsets:

1.       Gender is a constitutive element of social relationships based on the perceived differences between male and female.

2.       Gender is a primary way of signifying relationships of power.

a.       Culturally available symbols – mother earth, phallus, etc

b.       Normative concepts that try to limit these symbols.

c.       Kinship, economics, and politics influence ideas of gender

d.       Subjective identity – how one sees themselves

My understanding of her concept of gender is that it is contextual, informed by societal norms, and simply cannot be categorized as male or female.  I am not totally ignorant that gender identity is complex as I am aware of categories propagated by media in terms of the LGBTQ community.  Delving into a category of my own, which is simply male, I begin to question what this means.  Have I succumbed to the social and stereotypical norm of masculine male that I have restricted my introspection to only include what is “acceptable” to be a man?  Personally, Scotts definition has opened my eyes on what defines me.  Is it the outside telling me who to be, or is it truly what is inside that is being evoked. 

Going back to the issue of gender when it comes to scientific enquiry I now rethink what this can do for future study.  Interestingly, the European Union commissioned an inquiry into this issue titled Gender in Research (European Commission, 2001).  Although dated, it put forth some compelling arguments as to the future study considering gendered issues.  As Western sciences have a masculine character, gender stereotypes dominate scientific discourse, and this gender bias is shaping the scientific agenda which also is male dominated(European Commission, 2001). According to Schiebinger (1999), sustainable science needs to be pragmatic in that it considers goals and outcomes from a gendered perspective. It also requires the recognition of socio-economic elements to provide entry-points for the identification of gender impacts.  This gives me hope that as we change and learn more on gendered inequities, science is slowly trying to identify ways to accommodate.

In Canada, there is a program called Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) that allows people to report on policies, programs, initiatives or services that you feel are impacting gendered groups.  They do admit that the service is underused and are looking for improvements.

As I continue with my education and seek to provide evidenced based practice I will continue to critique and look for gender appropriate information.

References

European Commission (2001). Gender in Research, retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/research/pdf/gender-in-research-synthesis-report_en.pdf

Schiebinger, L. (1999) Has feminism changed science? Cambridge: Harvard University Press +

12, 201-206.

Scott, J. (1986) Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis. The American Historical Review 91(5) 1053-1075.