 
Lady Science Volume III

Edited by Leila.A. McNeill and Anna Reser

2016-2017
Lady Science Volume II: 2016-2017

Edited By Leila A. McNeill and Anna Reser

Published by Lady Science at Smashwords

Editorial material (c) 2017 Leila A. McNeill and Anna Reser

All content remains the copyright of its respective author and is published with permission.

Cover by Anna Reser

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Acknowledgements

We offer our sincerest gratitude to all of our supporters, whose contributions through one-time donations and monthly pledges have sustained the project and allowed us to grow.

We'd also like to acknowledge all of the skilled writers, editors, and brilliant thinkers who have contributed their work to this volume.

### We dedicate this volume to the women who have worked under the threat and reality of harassment and violence, to those who came forward and to those who still cannot.
### Contents

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Women and Science

Florence Nightingale: Of Myths and Maths by Joy Lisi Rankin

Mary Somerville, a Domestic Icon of Science by Michal Meyer

Forced into the Fringe: Margaret Murray's Witch-Cult Hypothesis by Kathleen Sheppard

The History of Data is the History of Labor: Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Creation of a "truth truer than a poem" by Deanna Day

Feminism, Fascism, and Frogs: The Case of Bertha Lutz at the United Nations by Cassia Roth

Emma Allison, a "Lady Engineer" by Robert Davis

What Does a Woman Know? by Kathleen Sheppard

Plants, Domesticity, and the Female Poisoner by Afton Lorraine Woodward

Gendered Bodies, Disabled Bodies

Seducing the 'Feeble-minded' by Adam Shapiro

Eugenics: Policing Everything by Joy Lisi Rankin

Talking like a "Princess": What Speaking Machines Say About Human Biases by Meryl Alper

The Cost of Disclosure: On Being a Woman with a Disability in Geophysics by Jesse Shanahan

Unacceptable Bodies by Anna Reser

The Profession and Women's Work

Lady Wranglers by Joy Lisi Rankin

Why Are We Still Talking About the "Naughty Nurse"? Jenna Tonn

The Personal in the Professional: a 19th-Century Hangover by Amanda Barnett

Feminist Anthropology Part I by Emma Louise Backe

Feminist Anthropology Part II: Violence in the Field, Violence in the Academy by Emma Louise Backe

Life and Death in Dioramas by Hillary Moses Mohaupt

Healing History: Women in Medicine by Abby Norman

Toward a Feminist Astrobiology by Anna Reser

Bibliography
Introduction

_Lady Science_ is an online magazine focusing on women and gender in the history and popular culture of science, technology, and medicine. Each year our writers and editors publish monthly critical essays on these topics, which we collect into an edited volume available as a free ebook. This volume of _Lady Science_ , which contains essays from 2016-2017, is part of our mission to make important and productive scholarship about women and gender available for free to students and the general public.

In this third anthology, our contributors continue their work to write women back into the history of science, technology, and medicine and to expose the structural reasons that they have been excluded or obscured. This entails not only vital recovery work in the area of biography and professional histories of women scientists but also the application of feminist theory to these histories to help us account for the structural oppressions that condense around race, gender, class, and disability.

This collection of essays features work on a wide range of topics in science, technology, and medicine by scholars, journalists, scientists, and historians. This collection is separated into three sections: Women and Science; Gendered Bodies, Disabled Bodies; and The Profession and Women's Work. Each section applies critical gender analysis to historical research in our usual mode, but this year we have also published interviews with working scientists, critical studies of disability, analyses of literature and popular culture, and work on the intersection of gender, science and politics.
Women and Science

While the essays in this section focus on individual women, each essay explores the structural barriers and cultural context in which of these women lived and worked. Some of these women, like Florence Nightingale and Mary Somerville, are well-known women in the history of science, but as the writers show, gender stereotypes and systemic inequalities in science and society and the stories that we tell about science perpetuate their marginalization. Other essays focus on virtually unknown women like inventor Emma Allison and archaeologist Caroline Ransom Williams, and these writers investigate the cultural and social context that relegated these women to the margins in their own time and have kept them unknown to us now.

In "Florence Nightingale: Of Myths and Maths," Joy Rankin shows a different, less well-known side of Florence Nightingale as a queer statistician, not as a mythologized nurse. In "Mary Somerville, a Domestic Icon of Science," Michael Meyer writes about astronomer and mathematician Mary Somerville, who, despite being hailed as one of the "great luminaries" of her time, was both esteemed and excluded as a woman in science. Kathleen Sheppard in "Forced to the Fringe: Margaret Murray's Witch-Cult Hypothesis" writes about archaeologist Margaret Murray and her work on witchcraft and folklore, work for which she was marginalized and that was ultimately appropriated by a man. In "The History of Data is the History of Labor: Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Creation of a "truth truer than a poem," Deanna Day writes about Mary Putnam Jacobi's systematic study of menstruation, which helped to set the foundation for modern day quantitative data collection.

Cassia Roth in "Feminism, Fascism, and Frogs: The Case of Bertha Lutz at the United Nations" looks at the scientific and activist career of Bertha Lutz and the fascistic political regime in 20th century Brazil. Robert Davis looks at another lesser-known figure in "Emma Allison, a 'Lady Engineer," in which he shows how the representation of Allison during her own time, despite her being a pioneering inventor, has contributed to her historical erasure. In "What Does a Woman Know?", Kathleen Sheppard looks at archaeologist Caroline Ransom Williams and how her work became buried the archives and left out of the historical narrative dominated by more famous men. Lastly, Afton Woodward explores the trope of the female poisoner in literature and popular culture and argues that such simplistic representation confines women's contributions to science to the domestic sphere.
Florence Nightingale: Of Myths and Maths

Joy Lisi Rankin

The way we tell stories about women matters. The way we remember women matters. Until recently, if you had asked me what I remembered about Florence Nightingale, I would have told you about her tireless work as a nurse. I would have said nothing about her tireless work as a mathematician, mainly because I had never learned about it. The mythology built around Florence Nightingale, nurse, demonstrates how and why the gendered stories that we tell about the past matter very much in the present.

My Nightingale mythology has centered on her work as a devoted nurse. In this story, she courageously left behind the creature comforts of her elite English home life to tend to British soldiers during the Crimean War. (1) She braved dirt, disease, and death to cure and comfort all of those daring, dashing young British men. In this grand narrative, she remained unmarried throughout her life in order to better serve as the virginal caretaker, a model of chaste womanhood. Her gentle and caring manner and the warmth of her personality—these are the characteristics that earned her the moniker "The Lady with the Lamp." I am confident that this is the Nightingale story that you remember, too.

Certainly, the general historical framework for this story is accurate. But the omission and reinterpretation of key details have served to perpetuate the norm of nursing as a pink-collar profession, in which practitioners have had second-class status compared with their doctor colleagues, who have been predominantly men. Indeed, Nightingale did care for ailing and injured soldiers during the Crimean War. In doing so, she challenged the social norms of upper-class Victorian England, which dictated that—as a woman—she should remain a dutiful daughter and then wife with little unsupervised contact with men. In her own time, Nightingale's parents resisted her efforts to pursue a nursing vocation. Her desire to help others initially made her an iconoclast, not a heroine.

Similarly, Nightingale's rejection of marriage has been mythologized as the ultimate sign of her devotion to nursing and nation. But really, she was flat-out rejecting marriage as a social institution. Moreover, she had the means to make that choice. Nightingale hailed from a wealthy and distinguished British family. Her grandfather served as a Member of Parliament for several decades. (2) She grew up on two large family estates and frequently visited London. Social and financial affluence afforded her the opportunity to safely reject marriage at a time when most women who did not marry struggled to support themselves for the rest of their lives.

Nightingale received several marriage proposals, all of which she declined. Instead, she chose to live with women companions over the course of her life. Some Nightingale scholars have debated whether or not she was a lesbian, but I think that debate masks a far more significant point. (3) I want to underscore that Nightingale's _choice_ was queer. (4) She rejected the gendered sexual politics of Victorian marriage, and she chose to live with other women on her own terms. She defied the dominant social and cultural norms of 19th-century English society, and she relentlessly pursued her own passions and interests.

Focusing on Nightingale the nurse has also obscured, indeed, almost completely effaced, Nightingale the statistician. (5) Nightingale's mathematical and intellectual abilities manifested from an early age. By age ten, she had created tables that displayed data about the fruits and vegetables produced in her family's gardens. She eagerly studied an album of pressed flowers that she received from Margaret Stovin, an expert botanist and a family friend. Her father, who had earned his education at the universities of Edinburgh and Cambridge, began teaching her formal mathematics when she was eleven. As a young woman, she requested and received private lessons in mathematics from a Cambridge-trained mathematics tutor. (6) And, her family socialized with prominent British intellectuals of their day, which enabled Nightingale to meet the polymath Charles Babbage.

Nightingale was a talented and creative statistician. She returned from the Crimea having collected extensive data on soldier mortality rates. She began a long collaboration with British statistician William Farr with the goal of reforming the British Army Medical Service, including hospitals. One of Nightingale's analyses revealed that British soldiers aged 25-35 had a mortality rate twice as high in military hospitals compared to civilian life. Another analysis showed that soldiers were far more likely to die at home or abroad during peacetime than they were during wartime because of the wretchedly unhygienic and unsanitary conditions in cities.

Nightingale completed her 850-page book _Notes on Matters Affecting Health, Efficiency, and Hospital Administration of the British Army_ in two years, toiling "sometimes for twenty-four hours out of twenty-four" to complete it. (7) Her statistical analyses, combined with her vocal calls for change, ultimately propelled major health and data collection reforms in both military and civilian hospitals. Crucial to her efforts were her illustrations that made these numbers compelling to the politicians with the power to implement reform.

Nightingale transformed data visualization. She realized that pages and pages of tables of numbers would not be nearly as arresting as a picture. She developed the graphic method known as the polar area graph to convey information about causes of death during the Crimean War. Nightingale's circular graph was divided into twelve sections, one section for each month of the year. The twelve wedges spread out at varying distances from the center with the length of each wedge corresponding to total army mortality rates per month. Each of the twelve wedges was then divided into three colors: blue representing deaths from contagious diseases such as cholera and typhus, red representing deaths from wounds, and black representing deaths from all other causes. At a glance, Nightingale's polar area graph cogently conveyed that the vast majority of deaths were from contagious diseases, which were largely preventable.

Nightingale saved many more lives with her mathematical work after the war than with her on-the-ground efforts in the Crimea. To be sure, she also transformed nursing education and helped professionalize the nursing profession. But, we should acknowledge and remember the other factors, like her social sphere and her unmarried status that contributed to the success of her statistical reforms and her nursing reforms.

Nightingale was very well-connected with ready access to Queen Victoria after the war. (8) Her active and ongoing choice to remain unmarried provided her with the time and energy to pursue her reforms—time and energy that otherwise would have been devoted to raising children and running an affluent household. And notably, after serving in the Crimea, Nightingale herself was often ill. She remained in bed for extended periods of time. She labored to protect and preserve her own health while improving the lives of others.

The Royal Statistical Society elected Nightingale as their first woman member in 1858. The American Statistical Association designated Nightingale an honorary foreign member in 1874. Victorian England celebrated Nightingale's mathematical prowess. Yet, most biographers since have highlighted Nightingale's selfless devotion to her nursing patients. They have reinscribed the 20th century status of nursing as a job for which a "desire to help" or "caring demeanor" was the primary requisite rather than showcasing a profession that required rigorous and extensive medical and scientific training.

These storytelling choices all matter. Emphasizing the nurse and not the mathematician flattens Nightingale. Interpreting her single status as devotion to patients and profession instead of acknowledging the determination and difference behind her unmarried status diminishes her.

The prevailing mythology of the "Lady with the Lamp" presents a milquetoast nurse-helpmate. All too often, our stories create one-dimensional women. Honoring and remembering Nightingale as an intelligent, resolute, and queer polymath—mathematician, data visualizer, reformer, educator, nurse, colleague, companion, sister, daughter—gives us a nuanced and multifaceted heroine. We should seek that complexity in women's stories and histories, embrace it, and share it.

### Notes

1 The Crimean War was fought during 1853-1856, primarily by the Russians against the British, French, and Ottoman Turkish. Most fighting occurred on the Crimean Peninsula, which juts into the Black Sea along its northern side. Today the Black Sea is bordered by Turkey (on the south), Bulgaria and Romania (on the west), Ukraine (on the north and east), and Georgia (on the east).

2 Parliament is the highest legislative body in the United Kingdom.

3 See Suzy Feay, "Florence Nightingale: A New Biography Sheds Light on the Lady with the Lamp," _Independent_ , September 27, 2008, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/florence-nightingale-a-new-biography-sheds-light-on-the-lady-with-the-lamp-942339.html.

4 Nadia Cho, "Being Queer Means...," _HuffPost_ , updated February 2, 2016, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/nadia-cho/being-queer-means_b_3510828.html.

5 Eileen Magnello, "Florence Nightingale: The Compassionate Statistician," _Plus Magazine_ , December 8, 2010, https://plus.maths.org/content/florence-nightingale-compassionate-statistician.

6 For further reading on the gendered nature of studying mathematics at the University of Cambridge during the nineteenth century, see Joy Rankin's essay "Lady Wranglers" in this anthology.

7 Quoted in Magnello, "Florence Nightingale: The Compassionate Statistician."

8 Queen Victoria reigned in Great Britain from 1837 to 1901.
Mary Somerville, a Domestic Icon of Science

Michal Meyer

On the morning of February 14, 1834, Charles Greville, registrar of the Privy Council read a sermon about some of the best-known scientific figures of the day, including one of the "great luminaries," a woman named Mary Somerville. Greville already knew of Somerville as a mathematician and a translator of the Marquis de Laplace's _Mécanique Céleste_ ( _Mechanism of the Heavens_ ), a highly mathematical work of celestial mechanics, which was viewed as a completion of Isaac Newton's project of unifying the earth and the heavens. For Greville, the "subject of astronomy is so sublime that one shrinks into a sense of nothingness in contemplating it, and can't help regarding those who have mastered the mighty process and advanced the limits of the science as beings of another order."

That same evening he happened to meet that "being of another order" while at a party. Greville could not take his eyes off Somerville. But his observations left him with mixed feelings and he later confided to his diary his "surprise and something like incredulity," for he found the great mathematician "a mincing, smirking person, fan in hand, gliding about the room, talking nothings and nonsense." (1) Especially shocking was the juxtaposition of a woman's everyday pleasure in social chatter combined with the knowledge that this particular woman had Laplace as "her plaything and Newton her acquaintance," which gave "too striking a contrast not to torment the brain."

In the 1830s, Somerville was an elite participant in science, well-known for her 1831 publication of Mechanism of the Heavens. She had published in the _Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London_ and would go on to publish again, though as a woman she could not be a member of that increasingly elite scientific society. Nor could Somerville visit the Astronomical Society's library. If she needed to consult a text, she sent a male friend to rummage for it. Somerville was both esteemed and excluded.

During Somerville's time, science was not yet a profession. It was practiced by clergymen, men with money, and doctors. Women could not become clergymen or doctors, but they could be a part of the doing of science; their work was often absorbed into the research of husbands and brothers and published under the name of the male member of the family. In fact, Somerville's friend, the geologist Charles Lyell, believed that had Somerville been married to a mathematician rather than a doctor, the world would never have heard her name: "[W]e should never have heard of her work. She would have merged it in her husband's, and passed it off as his." (2) Such actions were an open secret among the scientific men and women of the day.

According to Lyell, this was not due to any inherent female inferiority but rather to the nature of social relations at the time. Female fame was perilous; it could not be shared and, thus, laid its owner open to charges of self-aggrandizement, a charge especially dangerous when aimed at women. Somerville minimized her financial stake in the success of her books, which in actual fact was an important source of family income. She took care to ensure that no hint of the family's dire financial state during much of the 1830s ever reached the public. An accusation of writing for money might well have damaged her reputation.

Though Somerville published under her own name and was recognized as a practitioner of science, she recognized the fragility of her reputation and the difficulties of navigating the domestic private sphere, which was seen as female, and the public sphere, which was seen as male. She lacked the wealth and social status of an Ada Lovelace, a woman who could afford to flout conventions. Instead, Somerville took care to meet them, presenting herself as a fashionable, domesticated woman and avoided social peril by emphasizing her domesticity and her disinterested approach, meaning her love of the subject for its own sake. For example, Somerville always carefully tidied away any of her scientific writing when visitors called and showed off her domestic skills by making orange marmalade for William Edward Parry's Arctic expedition. Admirers of Somerville often linked her domestic skills to her scientific ones. Alexander Young, a visiting American, met Somerville on a visit to London and described her rhapsodically as "a lady, who to profound acquisitions in science, and a practical skill in several of the elegant arts, adds the faithful discharge of all household duties." (3)

Somerville recognized that her science would have to speak for itself, for she, as a woman, could not be its spokesman. The result occasionally produced surprise and consternation when those, like Charles Greville, who knew only of her scientific reputation first met her. Greville, an observer of rather than a participant in science, was looking for a goddess of science, but such a creature could not have survived in early 19th century England.

By 1838, Somerville was well-known in scientific and public circles, for science was a part of the broader educated culture. She had published the well-received _On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences_ four years earlier, which cemented her reputation as someone who could both do science and communicate it, at least to those already knowledgeable in the sciences. In 1835, the British government had given her a small pension as recognition for her work, and the Royal Astronomical Society made her an honorary member.

While her reputation was founded on Mechanism of the Heavens, Somerville's biggest impact was not in original research, but in original synthesis, which began with _Connexion_ and continued with Physical Geography (first published in 1848). Science was expanding its boundaries so rapidly that it appeared in danger of fragmenting. Gone were the days when natural philosophers were expected to have a broad grasp of the sciences. Those who wanted to understand what was happening elsewhere in the sciences might turn to Somerville's syntheses for knowledge.

William Whewell, a highly respected figure in 19th century science, was well aware of science's increasingly fragmentary nature, of its "proclivity to separation and dismemberment," and the barriers to knowledge this posed. Whewell coined the word "scientist" in the early 1830s and first put it to use in his 1834 review of Somerville's _Connexion_ in order to highlight the changing nature of the sciences. The old term of "natural philosopher" no longer accurately described the increasingly specialized workers in science. Somerville, in his view, helped to reunify the physical sciences by showing how the pieces fit together, linking such disparate elements as electricity, magnetism, heat, light, and sound. Science could once again be seen as a forest of knowledge rather than a jumble of individual trees, or as Whewell put it, "science as an extensive and splendid prospect, in which we see the relative positions and bearings of many parts."

By the time Somerville died in 1872, science had settled into specialized disciplines and even sub-disciplines. Her synthesizing approach became increasingly difficult to apply to broad swathes of science. She was a relic of an earlier age, but her name retained its resonance and power, enough for John Stuart Mill to ask to add her signature to his parliamentary petition to give women the vote. In 1869, he told Somerville that her name gave the petition "the weight and importance derived from the signature which headed it."

### Notes

1 Charles Greville, _The Greville memoirs : a journal of the reigns of King George IV, King William IV, and Queen Victoria_ (Longmans, Green, & Co., 1899).

2 Charles Lyell, _Life, letters, and journals of Sir Charles Lyell_ (John Murray, 1881).

3. Alexander Young, _A Discourse on the Life and Character of the Hon. Nathaniel Bowditch_ (Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1838), 51.

4 For further reading see Kathryn Neeley, _Mary Somerville: Science, Illumination, and the Female Mind_ (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001) and Elizabeth Chambers Patterson, _Mary Somerville and the Cultivation of Science, 1815-1840_ (Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1983).
Forced to the Fringe: Margaret Murray and Her Witch-Cult Hypothesis

Kathleen Sheppard

Margaret Murray was an Egyptologist at University College, London from 1894 to 1935. (1) She spent much of her career managing administrative and teaching duties in the department at UCL. As a result, she rarely went into the field, and, like most women in university science posts in the early 20th century, she had to diversify her work simply to make ends meet. Murray taught up to 30 hours per week, organized and cataloged museum collections all over Britain, wrote for various journals, reviewed dozens of books, and gave public lectures. Being a Jane-of-all-trades, so to speak, meant that Murray and others in her cohort were pushed into the margins of their disciplines. They were not really considered experts in any one field, so their work was not taken as seriously as the expert men they worked with.

During the years of the First World War when Murray found that there was not much work to do in archaeology because universities in England were either closed or operating in limited capacities due to the fact most students were fighting in the war, she decided to branch out into the study of anthropology and folklore. In 1915, she spent some time in Glastonbury, where she became enamored with stories of the Holy Grail. (2) She wrote about Egyptian connections to the Holy Grail, and in so doing, she dove deeper into the study of myths and legends. (3) This work quickly turned her attention to a little-studied subject in Britain at the time: the coming of Christianity and the end of pagan practices known as witchcraft.

Murray wrote the earliest anthropological studies on British witchcraft, soon becoming an expert in the subject. Her basic framework was expressed most clearly in a brief paper, "Organisations of Witches in Great Britain," read before the Folklore Society in April of 1917. (4) She then wrote two books, The Witch-Cult in Western Europe (1921) and The God of the Witches (1931), as well as an article on witchcraft in the 1929 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. (5) Each of these works builds upon the previous, and together, they present a coherent theory of pre-Christian practices in ancient and early-modern England.

Later, folklorist and self-proclaimed Mason Gerald Gardner put Murray's ideas into practice by adding some of his own ideas to hers, and using them to start a new neo-Pagan movement called Wicca. It spread widely and quickly, and according to a few different surveys, including the American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), there are presently over 500,000 practicing Wiccans, or Pagan Witchcraft practitioners, in the US alone. Murray's work in folklore is not unlike that of the powerful women healers of the early modern period who were marginalized, discredited, and then outed as witches, all while men used their knowledge of the body to create what we call modern obstetrics. (6) Murray's discipline-shifting ideas were ridiculed then ignored—only later to be appropriated and codified by a man with less experience.

Murray's work presented a theory, known as the witch-cult hypothesis: people, especially women, who were persecuted for being witches were, in reality, practicing an ancient, naturalistic religion that was widespread before Christianity came to Europe. The witch-cult was a religion with beliefs, rituals, and organization as highly-developed as that of any other in the world. The Christian European patriarchy demonized the practice, persecuting and executing its practitioners. To justify the punishment, the Christian nobility created a public fear of these seemingly demonic practices, which delegitimized the women involved in the religion. This ultimately resulted in such events as the Inquisition in Europe and the Salem Witch Trials in America. Christian rulers were frightened of the god of these witches, who was known to them as the Devil, Satan, Lucifer, and Beelzebub.

Murray was not focused on Operative Witchcraft, the effects of witch-charms, or the magical powers claimed by witches. She was, however, concerned with proving wrong the theory that personal accounts of witchcraft practices were in fact hallucinations induced by hysteria.

Murray claimed that groups that met to worship were known as covens. Each coven had no more than thirteen members who joined of their own free will, and each witch devoted themselves to the Master. The Master was seen as a god who frequently took the form of a person, usually a man, sometimes disguised with an animal mask or animal skins. Often, the god chose to take the actual form of an animal, such as a bull, goat, or horse. A third form the god could take was as a man with two faces, known as Janus or Dianus. The god of the cult was worshiped by initiates in elaborate ceremonies with rituals, dance, food, and bonfire. In all ceremonies attached to this god, Murray claimed, the main structure was the same everywhere, but the regional aspects could differ. She argued that these pagan groups lasted until the 18th century in some parts of Western Europe.

She maintained that the witches were not in a drug-induced hysteria, but were simply worshipping what they believed was a divine being. Her main goal in these works was to demonstrate that the practice was not fantastical or demonic, but rather constituted an anthropological survival from paganism into Christianity.

Based strictly on the anthropological evidence, much like J. G. Frazer's The Golden Bough, Murray may have been able to make a strong case. (7) Instead, she drew upon primary sources, actual eye-witness accounts of the interrogations and trials of the accused from the 7th to the 17th centuries. Most folklorists could agree with her, but her critics rejected her contention that accused witches were telling the truth, not just making up stories to appease their accusers. (8) Among Murray's opposition, evidence from trials was usually believed to have been given under duress and even torture. Murray was selective with the use of her sources, sometimes cutting important words from witness accounts without noting she had removed them. Critics argued that she also hid important clues to the true nature of accounts given at witch trials, which were full of important narrative motifs that would help a folklorist trace a story through time. Deemed useless, her work was largely ignored by the folklore community for decades.

To the chagrin of some current folklorists, the omission of Murray's work from contemporary discussion actually may have allowed her ideas to spread unchecked. Supporters of Murray's ideas, known as Murrayites, agreed with and continued to promote her thesis that witches were practicing a real, organized religion and should be studied as such. Murray gave witchcraft historical validity and, thus, a foundation on which people could build a new system of study. All scholars of witchcraft today must contend with her work because it set the foundation for witchcraft studies. (9)

In 1954, Gerald Gardner, the only member of the Folklore Society to adopt Murray's theory in full, wrote an extremely influential book, Witchcraft Today. (10) Gardner outlined the history of practical witchcraft using Murray's ideas of rituals, festivals, and organizations of witches as a sort of blueprint for setting up a new system of magical and religious rituals that became modern Wicca. Importantly, Murray wrote the introduction to this volume in which she supported Gardner's argument that modern witches simply practiced an expression of feeling towards God—the same that is experienced by modern Christians in church services. These modern Wicca practices are widely-known and widely-practiced, and Gardner is usually given the credit for them (for better or for worse).

Murray was marginalized as a folklorist in part because she was a woman, untrained in the appropriate anthropological methods of study, which meant that her conclusions were questionable. However, it is important to remember that Murray, whose life's work was Egyptology, was essentially freelancing in this work because it interested her. She tried to make a name for herself in folklore, and in the end, she was successful. Murray is now coming back into some favor. Folklorists still do not agree with her, but they are at least recognizing her ground-breaking contributions to the field.

Murray died in 1963, at the age of 100, a well-respected Egyptologist but a discredited folklorist. Her Egyptological career had been overshadowed by Great Man Flinders Petrie (even though I and others are working to shed light on her legacy). (11) Because of her seemingly fringe ideas, her reputation in folklore was damaged for decades, then usurped by a questionable pagan leader with little to no scholarly experience. (12)

Notes

1 Kathleen Sheppard, The Life of Margaret Alice Murray: A Woman's Work in Archaeology (Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2013).

2 James P. Carley, Glastonbury Abbey: The Holy House at the Head of the Moors Adventurous (London: St. Martin's Press, 1988).

3 Margaret Murray, "The Egyptian Elements in the Grail Romance." Ancient Egypt 3, no. 1 (1916): 1-14.

4 Margaret Murray, "Organisations of Witches in Great Britain." Folklore 28, no. 3 (1917): 228-58.

5 Margaret Murray, The Witch-Cult in Western Europe: A Study in Anthropology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1921; Reprint 1962); Margaret Murray, The God of the Witches (London: Faber & Faber, 1931); Margaret Murray, "Witchcraft." The Encyclopedia Britannica, Fourteenth Edition, Vol. 23, Vase to Zygote (1929): 686-88.

6 Leigh Whaley, Women and the Practice of Medical Care in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800 (London: PalgraveMacmillan, 2011), esp 174-195; J. Drife, "The Start of Life: A History of Obstetrics," Postgraduate Medical Journal 78 (2002) :311-315; James Wyatt Cook and Barbara Collier Cook, Man-midwife, Male Feminist: The Life and Times of George Macaulay, M.D., Ph.D. (1716-1766) (Ann Arbor: University Library Scholarly Publishing Office, 2004); B. P. Watson, "The Development of Obstetrics," Canadian Medical Association Journal 4, no. 6 (June 1914): 469-480.

7 James G. Frazer, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1922).

8 See, for example, E. M. Loeb, "Review: The Witch-Cult in Western Europe: A Study in Anthropology by Margaret Alice Murray," American Anthropologist New Series 24, no. 4 (1922): 476-8.

9 See Margot Adler, Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess-Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America, Revised and Expanded edition (Boston: Beacon Press, 1986); Alison Petch, "Margaret Murray," England: The Other Within, Analysing the English Collections at the Pitt Rivers Museum: http://web.prm.ox.ac.uk/england/englishness-Margaret-Murray.html.

10 Gerald Gardner, Witchcraft Today (London: Rider & Co., 1954).

11 Sheppard 2013; Ethan Doyle White, Wicca: History, Belief and Community in Modern Pagan Witchcraft (Sussex Academic Press, 2016).

12 _Caroline Oates and Juliette Wood,_ A Coven of Scholars: Margaret Murray and Her Working Methods _(London: Folklore Society, 1998)._
The History of Data is the History of Labor: Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Creation of a "truth truer than a poem."

Deanna Day

When Mary Putnam Jacobi was a girl in New York, it was an established scientific fact that women's bodies were vulnerable — that is, more vulnerable than the bodies of men. In the early 19th century, everyone knew that women's bodies were weaker, more susceptible to disease, and plagued by the influence of their emotions. The biggest liability of all was their menstrual cycles.

In the 1800s, menstruation was a process that (mostly male) scientists understood as unpredictable, debilitating, and dangerous. But, like many of the beliefs held by men about women's bodies during the 19th century, both the empirical and theoretical bases of these claims rested on epistemological foundations that were being eroded by new technologies, new techniques, and new people wielding them.

Despite these prevailing beliefs about women's bodies—which were used to justify excluding women from all kinds of supposedly taxing activities, including elite occupations—Mary Putnam Jacobi became one of the first women to rise to prominence in the medical profession. During Jacobi's lifetime, simply being a woman in medicine was a feat of some activism. But Jacobi went a step further by making women's rights the subject of both her political efforts and her scientific research. By conducting research focused specifically on menstruation, Jacobi took the entire medical profession to task for treating women's bodies as inherently pathological.

In an observation that foreshadows 20th century feminist theory, Jacobi noted that men's bodies were treated as if their reproductive health and sexual expression were, within wide parameters, neutral to the point of being "unsexed." By contrast, women's reproductive systems were treated as if in every case they were complicated, fragile, finicky, and liable to deteriorate at any moment. In other words, women were marked by their biology. Women had a biological sex that must be monitored and coddled. Men, by contrast, were practically without biological sex. Men were generically human, in need of no special consideration. Men simply...were.

In 1873, during Jacobi's first year as a professor at the Women's Medical College of the New York Infirmary for Women and Children, Harvard physician Edward H. Clarke published a book that set off a transatlantic debate about women's abilities to handle advanced education. In _Sex in Education; or, A Fair Chance for the Girls_ , Clarke argued that subjecting women to higher education, especially in programs where women would be educated alongside men, would place such an undue burden on women's physiology that they would become gravely ill, even to the point of lifelong sterility. (1)

Jacobi's response to this argument was to make the study of menstruation one of her first major research projects as a professor. Jacobi's goal was clear and explicit: to disprove the idea that menstruation was a debilitating condition for women.

Not only was this research goal radical in its own right, so too were the tools that Jacobi used to achieve it: quantitative data collection and statistical analysis. Jacobi distributed approximately a thousand survey tables, which asked women sixteen questions about their health, education, menstrual cycles, and physical abilities. From these, 268 women responded. They provided Jacobi with enough information to fill 24 separate tables of comparative data, which she used as a foundation to prove that women experienced no systematic or predictable debility during menstruation.

When Jacobi enrolled women into her medical research studies as active participants, she made them into medical workers. Her precedent would become a model used over and over for more than a century as medical researchers recognized women as ideal data-gatherers—they knew their own bodies, they were increasingly educated and able to follow instructions, and their labor was free.

Today, quantitative data collection and statistical analysis are generally accepted principles of scientific research; so accepted, in fact, that data and science are often used as almost interchangeable terms. But during the late 19th century, this approach to scientific discovery was still relatively new. Early data-collecting tools like thermometers and sphygmomanometers had only recently been introduced to medicine, and some physicians were resistant to tools they thought might usurp even a small amount of their expertise or authority. Many physicians, like the aforementioned Dr. Clarke, based their medical opinions and treatments on the more anecdotal method of examining individual case studies and comparing them to their previous clinical experiences.

When Jacobi finalized her menstruation research in an essay titled "The Question of Rest During Menstruation," she submitted it to Harvard University for consideration for its prestigious Boyslton Prize. (2) Given the controversy that surrounded its subject matter and the fact that her own reputation preceded her, her advisor recommended she submit the essay under a pseudonym. She chose the Latin phrase _Veritas poemate verior_ , "a truth truer than a poem." Based on a statistical analysis of quantitative data, she believed that her argument was more convincing—more truthful—than scientific claims based on poetic ideas of femininity or women's inherent frailty.

For Jacobi, and the generations of women who followed, physiological data was to become as truthful an expression of their bodies as their lived experience within it. The two have become indistinguishable after decades of immersion in a medical system that has asked women to keep symptom logs to track everything from menstruation and blood pressure to weight loss, cold and flu symptoms, and blood sugar levels.

Yet, despite Jacobi's own narratives of self-evident data, and the critical goal they served, quantitative data does not simply exist in the world, waiting to be scooped up and dropped into a table. Data is the end of a process, not the beginning of one.

Data production is always difficult. The world that scientists observe is never stable, so researchers have to make a choice about which moment to crystallize in a data point. Instruments can be finicky, producing different readouts at different times for reasons that may not be understandable. In medicine, data production has an additional degree of difficulty: medical research subjects aren't merely extant phenomena to be observed; they're people with individual experiences and foibles (like physical needs or faulty memories) that will always interrupt any data gathering protocol, even (maybe especially) if they are themselves the ones implementing it.

The history of data is the history of labor, and the history of labor is the history of women's labor. Because women's individual experiences are so often reduced to the particular, and the particular so often dismissed as the unimportant, translating ourselves into the form of collective data has often meant gaining recognition in the eyes of a medical authority that is incapable of seeing us in any other way. At the same time, making ourselves legible has also involved taking on the burden of data creation: monitoring ourselves, recording ourselves, and even modifying ourselves to massage "better" data for our doctors.

Women's bodies are both the raw material of medical research and one of the agents of its production. The data that we make is both a product and a tool, a thing we make and a thing that makes us. Data isn't truth, but language. It can help us decide or express the truth, but data never is the truth.

### Notes

1 Edward H. Clarke, _Sex in education; or, A fair chance for girls_ (Houghton Mifflin, 1873).

2 Mary Putnam Jacobi, "The question of rest during menstruation." (G. P. Putnam and Sons, 1877).

3 See also Carla Bittel, _Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Politics of Medicine in Nineteenth-Century America_ (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2009) and Lisa Gitelman, ed., " _Raw Data" is an Oxymoron_ (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013).
Feminism, Fascism, and Frogs

Cassia Roth

In the summer of 1945, the Brazilian scientist and suffragist Bertha Lutz arrived in San Francisco to participate as a delegate at the United Nation's founding conference. At first glance, Lutz's presence at the conference seems a logical step in her impressive feminist career. Lutz had been at the forefront of Brazil's suffrage movement for decades as president of the Federação Brasileira pelo Progresso Feminino (Brazilian Federation for Feminine Progress, FBPF). After Brazilian women achieved the vote in 1932, Lutz became one of the first women elected to Congress.

Lutz was also a leading figure of the international feminist scene in the interwar years, participating in numerous global conferences on suffrage and women's rights, and closely allying herself with Carrie Chapman Catt's U.S. National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). Her feminist organizing in the 1920s and 30s was matched only by her dedication to her scientific career. Trained as a zoologist and working as a herpetologist (the study of frogs), Lutz gained international prominence in the 1930s, a period when prominent female careers in science were rare in Brazil—and across the globe.

Lutz's feminist and scientific agenda were intricately interconnected. When Lutz wrote _Thirteen Principles_ in 1933, a feminist guide for the committee that was rewriting the Brazilian Constitution, she included specific mentions of women's intellectual equality to men and used rational scientific language. Additionally, the FBPF supported and attended scientific events such as the 1934 First Brazilian Conference on the Protection of the Environment. Historians have contended that "[Lutz's] involvement with the scientific environment influenced and found support in this group of women [the FBPF] who sought to occupy more and more public spaces and participate in important decision-making processes for the society in which they lived." (1) When Lutz became a member of Congress in 1936 and assumed the chair of the Special Congressional Commission on the Statute on Women, she put forth both a scientific agenda and feminist one. Her personal correspondence with feminists, government officials, and scientists includes references to both her feminist endeavors and her scientific career.

Lutz's longstanding and illustrious feminist activism and her adherence to transnational organization seems to be the obvious reason behind her presence at the UN in 1945. But if we look more closely at Brazilian politics at the end of World War II, her role at the conference becomes more complicated. In fact, her presumably neutral scientific career was also a key factor in her UN participation.

Throughout the 1930s, Brazilian politics became increasingly populist under the leadership of president Getúlio Vargas. His rise to power in 1930 altered the existing political structure based on a tradition of patronage and economic privilege. As we saw, this political change initially facilitated the continued efforts of the FBPF, as Vargas was sympathetic to their cause. But the progressive legislation of the early 1930s that Lutz and her fellow feminists had fought for was short lived. By the mid 1930s, political unrest threatened the government, which began to crack down on political organizing.

In 1937, Vargas dissolved Congress and ended electoral politics with the onset of his fascist dictatorship, the Estado Novo (or New State, which lasted until 1945). The Estado Novo co-opted all forms of activism, subsuming labor and women's rights under a clientelistic patronage system in which the government provided services and favors in return for support. The Estado Novo de-politicized the women's movement by including it within an authoritarian political system. Vargas's new regime was both inherently and explicitly patriarchal and paternalistic. He rhetorically fashioned himself as the "father" of the nation, and his political ideology relegated women to the roles of wives and mothers. Vargas's actual policies, including protectionist legislation that discriminated against working women, put this rhetoric into action. However, while Vargas was cracking down on democratic policies at home, he was also the only Latin American leader to join the Allied forces fighting in WWII. Of course, fascism functions in funny ways.

Lutz's role in creating the UN's framework in 1945 to prevent the return of international fascism marked almost a decade since Brazilians had been able to participate in democratic politics at home. And Vargas, who had sent her to San Francisco, was still intent on promoting dictatorship. Katherine Marino has demonstrated how Lutz's continued pan-American feminist organizing throughout World War II and the Estado Novo kept her at the forefront of international feminist issues—if not national ones. (2) Clearly, Lutz still had considerable standing among both the leaders of the Brazilian feminist movement and those of their international counterparts. But why did Vargas, who was ruling as a fascist at home, send a strident feminist to represent Brazil at the UN?

Lutz's scientific career during the politically repressive Estado Novo gives us insight into her participation at the UN. With the Estado Novo, Vargas had created a strong federal government that supported the arts and sciences through wide-reaching and well-funded initiatives. In fact, Vargas viewed the development of national culture—art, scientific inquiry, education—as central to his creation of a nationalistic Brazilian identity. Fascists aren't inimical to cultural and scientific pursuits. On the contrary, state support for scientific inquiry has long been the lynchpin of fascist regimes the world over. So while Vargas shut down Lutz's political ambitions after the Estado Novo, his extensive state patronage for science as a "Brazilian" pursuit opened up a politically neutral public space for Lutz's scientific career to flourish.

Lutz's scientific career thrived during the dictatorship, and she rose in the ranks as a tenured faculty member at Rio de Janeiro's prestigious Museu Nacional (National Museum). Lutz had entered the Museum as a secretary in 1919, only the second woman to hold a position in the civil service. In 1930, she was promoted to secretary of translation, and in 1937, Vargas promoted her to the position of naturalist, with successive promotions in scientific rank throughout the Estado Novo. In 1939, Vargas named Lutz to the Brazilian Inspections Council on Artistic and Scientific Expeditions (CFEACB), where she became an important and decisive member until 1951. She took over the position from her friend and colleague Heloísa Alberto Torres, daughter of the famed abolitionist Alberto Torres, who had left to become the first female director of the National Museum.

While at the CFEACB, Lutz worked with other leading scientists and intellectuals to formulate policy on diverse matters, including the development of the sciences and the protection of the environment. Lutz's work in the CFEACB demonstrated her interest in supporting the growth of scientific institutions in Brazil and connecting those institutions to larger political goals. She also became active in museum studies, participating in international conferences and publishing on the subject in Brazil. Her scientific organizing placed her in a less-than radical public position, one which feminists seized upon when they began lobbying Vargas to include a woman delegate to the UN.

At the UN Conference, Lutz proved instrumental in changing the Charter's language and in creating the UN's Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). In 1948, she, along with Virginia Gildersleeves of the U.S., Minerva Bernardino of the Dominican Republic, and Wu Yi-Tang of China, were the only women to sign the UN's Declaration of Human Rights. As UN historian Hilkka Pietilä writes, "[These women] were instrumental in the movement that demanded the Preamble to the UN Charter reaffirm not only nations' 'faith in fundamental human rights' and 'the dignity and worth of the human person,' but in 'the equal rights of men and women.'" (4)

Only months after Lutz's return to Brazil, Vargas was deposed in a coup. In a November 2, 1945 letter to her brother Gualter, Lutz flipped the gendered script of the Estado Novo when expressing her views on the coup: "one can't help feeling a bit sorry for him. At the last every one of his creatures abandoned him." (5) The country's patriarch had fallen and needed taking care of. Perhaps Lutz felt endearment to the man who had helped win the vote for women (before taking it away) and who had sent her to the UN.

Whatever her feelings for Vargas, Lutz's actions at the UN in favor of international democracy surely influenced politics back in Brazil. When Lutz's feminist ambitions to advance women's political participation faltered at home, her efforts to promote gender equality in science flourished. And this dedication to science allowed Lutz to return to international feminist activism, where her participation in the creation of an international democratic framework perhaps weakened fascist rule in Brazil. Both frogs and feminism helped Bertha Lutz defy fascism at home and abroad.

### Notes

1 Mariana Moraes de Oliveira Sombrio, Mary Margaret Lopez, and Lea Maria Leme Strini Velho,"Práticas e disputas em torno do patrimônio científico-cultural: Bertha Lutz no Conselho de Fiscalização das Expedições Artísticas e Científicas do Brasil." _Varia hist_ 24, no. 39 (2008).

2 Katherine Mariono, "The heritage of Latin American women's political empowerment." _Gender News_ , August 2, 2012.

3 Heloísa Alberto Torres (1895- 1977).

4 Hilkka Pietilä, _The Unfinished Story of Women and the United Nations_ (United Nations, 2007).

5 Museu Nacional, coleção Bertha Lutz, correspondência, document 115/9.

6 See also Susan K. Besse, _Restructuring Patriarchy: The Modernization of Gender Inequality in Brazil, 1914-1940_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996) and Katherine M. Marino, "Transnational Pan-American Feminism: The Friendship of Bertha Lutz and Mary Wilhelmine Williams, 1926-1944," _Journal of Women's History_ 26, no. 2 (2014): 63-87.
Emma Allison, A Lady Engineer

Robert Davis

In 1876, the Centennial Exhibition, the first United States world's fair, opened in Philadelphia to celebrate the nation's 100 year anniversary. With its mission mandated by Congress to showcase "the nation's progress in arts which benefit mankind," the exhibition, which spread across 285 acres, included displays of natural resources, art, wildlife, horticulture, and historical artifacts, among others. (1) As a self-consciously epoch-making event, nations, states, and corporations were eager to present their accomplishments. To be included in the exposition was to claim a share of American progress, something that a group of women hoped to do by erecting their own Women's Pavilion at the Centennial. The representation of women at the exhibition, especially as inventors and technologists, created a controversy about the role of women in public life in 19th-century America.

Women were involved with the exposition from the planning stage. The Board of Finance created a Women's Centennial Executive Committee to help with fundraising, and when the Committee raised more than $2,000,000, they were granted exhibition space in the exposition's flagship 20-acre Main Building. (2) Although the Women's Committee members were hopeful that this signalled a shift in the representation of women in public spaces, they were soon disappointed by the all-male Centennial Board, which sold the space to outside exhibitors and informed the Women's Committee that it would have to finance and construct its own building. The Women's Committee quickly rallied to plan, fund, and build a freestanding 30,000 square foot Women's Pavilion. Although it was designed by a man, all of the exhibits inside, ranging from art to needlework to new farming equipment, were created by women. It was the first international exhibition of American "women's work."

A brick addition to the Women's Pavilion housed the Baxter Portable Engine, a six-horsepower steam engine that powered the building's machines, including a printing press that published pamphlets and a weekly newspaper, _The New Century For Woman_. (3) The Women's Committee wanted to show that women could design and operate industrial technology and, thus, contribute to industrial progress. The Baxter Engine, and its engineer Emma Allison, became a focal point of the ensuing debate about a woman's right to enter technological fields.

All exhibits in the Pavilion were staffed by women, including the Baxter Engine. During open hours, Allison operated all aspects of her "iron pet." She started the fire in morning and stoked it throughout the day, maintained the correct pressure, and shut it down at night. She also played the role of public ambassador, presenting the machine to fair visitors, all while dressed in her Sunday clothes to show how easily she could perform the labor.

Almost immediately, Allison's role operating the Baxter Engine became a subject of curiosity and speculation. At a time when many feared that increased social responsibilities would cause women to abandon their "proper" duties as wives and daughters, the Women's Pavilion experienced pushback from the beginning. _The New Century_ reported that "there was, of course, much opposition to the project, one of the arguments used, not in the committee but by outsiders, being that the committee would some day find the Pavilion blown to atoms and it would be discovered that the female engineer had lost herself in some interesting novel when she ought to have been watching the steam-gauge." The increase of both women entering the workforce and partaking in new entertainment crazes, like reading novels, caused tremendous anxiety among advocates for traditional gender norms. Women's enthusiasm for reading novels, which were depicted as a "moral poison," was a documented social "problem" in this period, causing many doubt that women were capable of taking an equal role in society. (4)

_The New Century_ presented Allison as a natural feature of modernity, noting that Allison was "overrun with visitors, who gazed upon the strange, yet, in this age of progress, not unexpected spectacle." (5) An article in the July 8, 1876 S _aturday Evening Post_ saw Allison's demonstration, in which "she gave a deeply interesting account of the different parts of the engine and the manner of running it, etc.," as a sign of social change. _The Post_ wrote that "the ease with which she accomplishes the management of her busy machine, the care of which has hitherto been deemed to lie essentially within man's province, marks a decided epoch in female labor." (6)

Scientific American treated her as a one of the many things on display, noting that "[p]erhaps the most interesting object... in the woman's edifice is the lady engineer." (7) A Philadelphia Times article that was reprinted widely focused on her appearance, pointing out that she was "by no means a soot-begrimed and oil-covered Amazon," perhaps to remind the reader that running a machine did not compromise Allison's performance of proper gender norms. (8) According to _The New York Times_ , the displays in the Women's Pavilion were unfeminine because the women who talked to the public were driving "visitors away by black looks or surly answers" and were "exceedingly disagreeable and disobliging." (9)

Perhaps to counter these criticisms, Allison regularly held court on her upbringing and vision for the future. She told visitors that she first became interested in machines as a child, and chose to spend her time in the mills that her father owned in Ontario. When asked about the future, she observed that there were thousands of machines in operation in the U.S. the size of the Baxter engine and saw no reason why women couldn't run them. While some questioners expressed dismay that a woman could do such work, Allison replied that it was easier than being a nursemaid and less tiring than bending over a stove. She took the point further and criticized how male engineers kept slovenly machine rooms, something that women engineers would presumably not tolerate. (10)

While the Women's Committee could present women as productive members of society, it had to avoid radical political positions like suffrage. Neither _The New Century_ or the pamphlets advocated for suffrage, nor did the Women's Committee welcome suffragist organizations, which had to open parlors in private Philadelphia homes to discuss radical platforms. The Women's Committee did not grant black women exhibition space despite their having worked to raise money for the building's construction. The Women's Committee denied Susan B. Anthony and her cohort inclusion in the exhibition's official centennial celebrations on July 4, 1876. However, radical women refused to stand at the margins of the fair. While several male dignitaries gave speeches about American liberty during a large parade and ceremony at Independence Hall, Anthony occupied the stage and read the "Declaration of Rights for Women" as activists handed out copies of the document. (11)

It is tempting to read the 1867 World's Fair as groundbreaking moment for women in public life, but the criticism leveled at the Women's Pavilion and Allison's experience highlight the broad limits placed on women claiming public space. Keeping women out of political and labor spheres was an important tactic in political control in the 19th century. The next U.S. World's Fair, in New Orleans in 1884-1885, denied its Women's Committee a separate structure and gave them less exhibit space than in Philadelphia by placing the displays in a wing of the U.S. Government Building. According to one reviewer, the Women's Department was "wholly and of necessity inadequate to present a view of the attainments of women in the industries and arts, and their share in carrying forward the world's civilization." (12) It was not until the 1893 Columbian Exposition that American women would earn another space of their own in a world's fair.

The 1876 Centennial was a key debut for women inventors, engineers, and artists that highlighted both the successes and struggles that women faced as they organized to claim public space in science and society, but it was not an unqualified victory. Much of the documentation of the Women's Committee remains unpublished in archives. If brought to light, it could reconstruct a vital moment in history when women were breaking into new fields of labor and representation. (13)

### Notes

1 J.L. Smith, International Exhibition, Fairmount Park, Philadelphia, 1876: Acts of Congress, Rules and Regulations, Description of the Buildings (Philadelphia: United States Centennial Commission, 1875), 11.

2 For images of the buildings and grounds, see "United States Centennial Exhibition," Philadelphia Free Library, https://libwww.freelibrary.org/digital/feature/centennial/.

3 George D. Curtis, Souvenir of the Centennial Exhibition (Hartford, CN: Geo D. Curtis, 1877), 135-36. For issues of _The New Century For Woman,_ see https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000547459 .

4 F.C.W., "Moral Poisons: The Antidote," _Mother's Magazine_ , May 1845, 148-52; Jonathan Townley Crane, _Popular Amusements_ (Cincinnati: Hitchcock and Walden, 1869 ), 121-52.

5 "What One Woman is Doing," _New Century For Woman_ , June 3, 1876, 26.

6 "At the Centennial Exhibition," _Saturday Evening Post_ , July 8, 1876, 4.

7 "The Centennial Exhibition," _Scientific American_ , June 24, 1876, 401.

8 "A Woman in an Engineer's Role," _Philadelphia Times_ , June 2, 1876, .

9 "The Great Exhibition: What Women Have Done For It," _New York Times_ , June 4, 1876, 1.

10 James D. McCabe, _The Illustrated History of the Centennial Exhibition_ (Philadelphia: National Publishing Company, 1876), 591.

11 For the text of the Declaration, see http://ecssba.rutgers.edu/docs/decl.html.

12 Eugene V. Smalley, "In and Out of the New Orleans Exposition, Second Paper," _Century Illustrated Magazine_ , June 1885, 188

13 See also T. J. Boisseau and Abigail M. Markwyn, eds., _Gendering the Fair: Histories of Women and Gender at World's Fairs_ (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2010); Bruno Giberti, _Designing the Centennial: A History of the 1876 International Exhibition in Philadelphia_ (Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2002); Mary Francis Cordato, "Towards a New Century Women and the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, 1876," _Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography_ 107, no. 1 (1983): 113-36; Louise Krasniewicz, "The Life and Adventures of Emma Allison." https://emmaallison.me/.
What Does a Woman Know?

Kathleen Sheppard

Whenever I have the chance, I can't resist watching any of the _The Mummy_ movies or _Indiana Jones_ movies (except _The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull_ , but that's an issue for another time). As an archaeologist, I think I'm supposed to avoid them in some sort of protest over how the fictionalized version of my discipline is sensationalized, but I get drawn into the stories, the adventures, and, of course, the characters. I do, however, take issue with the lack of presence women have in many of the films.

In _Indiana Jones_ , the women exist as foils to the male characters as damsels in distress, of course. The one woman who was a scholar, Dr. Elsa Schneider in _The Last Crusade_ , turned out to be a Nazi and died a horrible death. _The Mummy_ presents women a little bit differently. The one main female character, Evelyn Carnahan, is a scholar herself, but she is clumsy, bookish, prudish, and needs the hero, Rick O'Connell, to save her life in the field. In one memorable scene from the first movie of the franchise, the other Egyptologist, Dr. Allen Chamberlain, watches as Evelyn directs her crew into a pit, and he smirks and says, "They are led by a woman. What does a woman know?" As the film goes on, it turns out that that particular woman knew quite a lot.

In fairness, Schneider and Carnahan were fictional women, but as Leila McNeill and Anna Reser (and others) have pointed out earlier in previous Lady Science essays, the misrepresentation of women in film does a disservice to the way the public views their presence in science. (1) For archaeology, these well-known fictional examples portray women who could not or should not be archaeologists, scholars, or field scientists; these representations implicitly argue that women were probably not present in archaeology at all (and if they were, they were silly). We know that this is not true. More to the point, there were a number of women archaeologists who did important work in the field, in publications, in museums, and in universities, but like much of the work women have done in the sciences, their labors are not considered Science. Their lives and careers tend to be erased in the historical record because they did not do heroic, exciting fieldwork, but instead did the seemingly hum-drum administrative work of cataloguing, organizing, and publishing the finds of the hero. In the end, many of these women got married and had families, further removing them from their career or ending it altogether, unlike their male colleagues whose marriages made them more productive. No matter their training or accomplishments, women archaeologists have been buried by Great Men.

One example of this sort of burial can be found in the life and work of Caroline Ransom Williams (1872-1952). She was a student, then friend and colleague, of James Henry Breasted at the University of Chicago. (2) In the Oriental Institute's archives, there is a whole section with letters between the two of them. She doesn't get her own folder or even her own box (no one does in this archive except for Breasted's wife). But she's there. I found her first in the Ls for Lake Erie Seminary (from where she first wrote to Breasted in 1898); then in the Rs for Ransom, Caroline; then finally in the Ws for Williams, Mrs. Grant (Caroline Ransom). They wrote to each other for 37 years, from the time of Ransom Williams' first letter to him in 1898 until Breasted's death in 1935. (3) Through the decades, a number of issues come through in these letters—family ties, true friendship, collegial scholarship, mutual dependence. The two share friends, interests, and expertise. They share gossip about old friends. They trade barbs about scholars they have to work with and share advice when it comes to dealing with the difficult ones. Throughout her early career, she and Breasted became close friends, colleagues, and confidants, and it is through these letters that Ransom Williams' life story comes to light.

Her professional trajectory was not unlike those of her male colleagues at the time. She came from an upper middle-class family, received a university education, went on a European Grand Tour while at university, and decided to pursue an advanced degree. She pursued her education as any of her male colleagues did: by applying to the leading schools in her field and writing to the heads of departments personally, looking for financial and moral support. She found support at the University of Chicago in James Breasted, who encouraged her to come to Chicago for her studies. From 1898, Ransom Williams worked with Breasted and followed in his footsteps to Berlin, to work with the same scholars he did when he was a student, and came back to Chicago to complete her PhD in 1905. After her PhD, she published her dissertation, _Studies in Ancient Furniture_ , as a book. (4) She got a faculty position at Bryn Mawr, which she then gave up to work as the Assistant Curator in the new Egyptian Art Department at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (MMA) under Albert Lythgoe.

Ransom Williams clearly did everything she was supposed to do: she ticked all the boxes, she followed all the rules, she played the game the right way. She was a scholar, author, and well-respected instructor.

So, where did she go?

In 1916, Dr. Caroline Ransom became Mrs. Grant Williams. When she got married, she wrote to Breasted that she refused to stop doing her work, which was mostly true. Getting married did not stop her from working, but it hindered most of her scholarly pursuits. Like many professional women in this period, she was expected to put her career on hold, if not end it all together, in order to take care of the home, husband, and any children the marriage may bring. They never had children, but her husband's lucrative career in real estate along with her elderly mother's need for care from 1905 until her death in 1933 meant that she had to figure out a way to balance her work and her home life. To do this, Ransom Williams began commuting from Toledo, Ohio to Manhattan a few times a year to work with the MMA and the New York Historical Society (NYHS). She was continually offered cataloging work, curatorial work, field work, teaching jobs, writing projects, and more, but most of them were in New York or Egypt. She turned many of the opportunities down, saying that the job should go to someone else who could do it better and more quickly. Many times those who took on the work were men, freed from the domestic concerns that Ransom Williams had to bear.

Ransom Williams kept writing and publishing, but these projects were holdovers from her earlier work at the MMA and NYHS. (5) She wrote many book reviews and a few popular articles for the Egypt Exploration Fund (now Society), for the NYHS journal, and others. One season Breasted brought her to Egypt with his crew (1926-27), and she was excited about it. In fact, he frequently asked her to come to Chicago to teach, but she continually turned him down, vaguely telling him she was "not free" to do so. The truth was that Ransom Williams had challenging domestic responsibilities.

Because of her domestic concerns, as well as other piecework she was trying to do, one of the projects she gave over was the translation, transcription, and publication of what would become the famous Edwin Smith Medical Papyrus. (6) In November 1920, Ransom Williams wrote to Breasted about "the medical papyrus of the Smith collection." She told him that there had been some issues with the management of the papers at the NYHS and that they wanted someone to work on it right away:

"The papyrus is probably the most valuable one owned by the Society and I am ready to waive my interest in it, in the hope that it may be published sooner and better than I could do it." (7)

This reasoning is a common thread that runs throughout the correspondence from her side. Ransom Williams passed the work to Breasted because he, ostensibly, had the ability and the name to do it well. It took him 10 years (the work was published in 1930), and the fine production brought him even more recognition. Breasted's name is usually closely associated with the papyrus, and, even though he acknowledged Ransom Williams in the publication, a short mention hardly seems worthy once you understand the extent of her involvement and self-sacrifice.

The papyrus is one example of many I could detail where Ransom Williams gave up a career-boosting project for her family's needs. For Ransom Williams, and for many women in the early days of academic archaeology, we can easily ask questions like: "If she had stayed in New York, would she have been the first female curator at the MMA after Lythgoe?" or "If she had accepted any of the jobs Breasted offered her at Chicago, would she have been the first full-time female professor in that department?" There is always the question of married women in this period: "If she had not married, would she have been able to choose her own path and we would know her more?" Had she been a man, we would not have to ask them. Men in this period, like Breasted, had wives and children, which did not hinder their fieldwork or productivity in the discipline. In fact, many times marriage helped men's careers.

Because she was a woman, we must be careful not to pigeon-hole her career as "lost." We do have to recognize that, in archaeology, the question of "what does a woman know?" is actually a foundational issue. Women knew, and did, much of the work to lay the foundations of the science, but it was men who tended to get the credit.

Ransom Williams was not a groundbreaking institution founder, although she gave aid to Breasted, who was. She was not a best-selling author, although sometimes she happily prepared the materials for best-selling books, edited, proofread, and indexed them for Breasted. She was not a professor who trained a whole generation of scholars who went on to take over the discipline, but she was a colleague and assistant to men who were. The work she did was not what many would call glamorous, but it was worthwhile, discipline-building scholarship. She did the research, wrote the books, gave the talks, wrote the reviews, and went into the field. But because of her choices in her personal life, she was unable to make the professional leap that she had seemed poised to make in 1916.

Her story, in and of itself, is an important one in the history of science. Her contributions and impact on the field were critical, and the esteem to which men like Breasted and Lythgoe held her demonstrated that. But her life also fits into the large group of women professional scientists who lost and continue to lose their careers not because they don't want to do the hard work or because they simply can't hack it. No, women scientists leave science because of the difficulties of balancing the physical and emotional burdens of home with the burdens of work. This work largely lacks the infrastructure for understanding that scientists sometimes must be able to care for families and participate in a professional capacity. In all fairness to Ransom Williams' colleagues, they continued to include her in their pursuits and plans, but these were too far afield for her to commit to them. Despite her hard work, she was one of many women who had followed the same path her male colleagues took, but who got buried in the dust of the archive.

### Notes

1 Leila A. McNeill and Anna Reser, "Delivery Room Drama." Lady Science 1, no 1 (2014); Leila A. McNeill, "One Last Bone to Pick," Lady Science 1, no. 2 (2014).

2 Jeffrey Abt, _American Egyptologist: The Life of James Henry Breasted and the Creation of His Oriental Institute_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011).

3 Kathleen Sheppard, ed. _My Dear Miss Ransom: Letters between Caroline Ransom Williams and James Henry Breasted, 1898-1935_. (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2018).

4 Caroline L. Ransom, _Studies in Ancient Furniture; couches and beds of the Greeks, Etruscans and Romans_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1905).

5 See, for example, Caroline Ransom Williams, _The Tomb of Per-Neb, with illustrations_ (New York: The Gilliss Press, 1915).

6 J. H. Breasted, T _he Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, Volume 1: Hieroglyphic Transliteration, Translation, and Commentary, OIP 3_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1930).

7 CRW to JHB, November 22, 1920, Breasted Archive at the Oriental Institute.
Plants, Domesticity, and the Female Poisoner

Afton Lorraine Woodward

When I saw that the new character in the Clue board game was going to be a woman botanist with an affinity for poison, I thought it sounded very, tiredly familiar. This is not to say that the addition of a woman scientist to a board game should not be considered progress; even in a game with murder as its primary motif, a woman character defined by her career rather than her marital status is preferable. But far from instigating a "feminist coup," Dr. Orchid is only the latest in a stereotype-rich line of women botanists and poisoners from mythology, detective stories, comics, and science fiction. Modern stories, including comics, are slowly letting women scientists be geneticists, engineers, hackers—even Iron Man. But botany, especially when it can be a front for a poisoning operation, is over-ascribed to women as a profession of choice.

I looked to some early American examples for information on how attitudes toward real-life women botanists have evolved. Tina Gianquitto's book _"Good Observers of Nature": American Women and the Scientific Study of the Natural World, 1820-1885_ paints an illuminating portrait of women's relationship with plants in the Enlightenment and into the 19th century. (1) At that time, the separate-spheres dogma for men and women also applied to science; scientific reasoning and experimentation were masculine pursuits, whereas decorating the living room was a more appropriate activity for women. When they did write about plants, women were expected to emphasize the moral and theological lessons to be learned from the Linnaean structure of the natural world. Some claim that Linnaeus's gendered classifications of plants reinforced and encouraged this gendered binary, giving preference to strong, "masculine" characteristics in the natural world. (2)

Eventually, as educational reform took hold, botany became an acceptable and even ideal pursuit for young ladies. Observations of the natural world could underscore moral lessons and provide girls with reasoning skills and an understanding of the logical structure of the universe. That logical structure was still socially gendered, though. One relatively progressive textbook, Elizabeth Phelps's 1832 _Familiar Lectures on Botany_ , eschewed the unscientific theological approach to botany, but in encouraging girls to pursue a rational study of the world, it still maintained the goal of preparing them for domestic life. (3) Applying critical thinking and observational skills to plants would help eliminate scandal and frivolity, Phelps claimed, by giving a woman a sound, reasonable mind that she would use to improve her surroundings and help others—namely, her family. It often went without saying that women were to study the plants around their own homes, not travel to exotic locales for more extensive research. Furthermore, in most cases even accomplished women botanists, such as Jane Colden, called the first American woman botanist, were praised as "good observers," not experimenters or innovators. (4)

Cataloging and growing plants became a safe hobby, though rarely a full-time occupation for women, as they were generally supposed to be patient and inactive. Botany was distinct from more abstract sciences like physics or more practical ones like engineering; at their most hands-on, women might concoct new herbal remedies for stomach aches or eczema. In a way, it was socially acceptable for them to observe and tend to plants because that role was not far off from that of a caregiver. In just about all depictions of women botanists, they are seen as caring for their plants in the same way as they might care for their own children. Even today, this seemingly natural or inherent tendency to observe and nurture dominates even otherwise progressive characterizations of women scientists.

Poison, then, offers an appealing corollary to all of these notions. We can trace the woman poisoner trope along a different route than the one the woman botanist follows, but the two overlap in significant ways. Poison is traditionally, though not always, a female mode of attack. Classical lore features many women accused of poisoning their spouses, lovers, or rivals: Medusa, Hecate, Circe, Medea, and Agrippina the Younger, to name a few. In particular, witches of literature and accused witches of real life are often associated with potions and spells that make use of poisonous plants found around the home and garden: oleander, hemlock, castor beans (ricin), foxglove, various kinds of berries, and nightshades. Men, of course, make use of poison as well, like Shakespeare's Claudius and Romero. But the subtle and seductive art of poison is often used as a storytelling device to comment upon the nature, and especially the flaws, of women.

Poison is a deceptive weapon, and stories about it play on fascinations with and anxieties about what women are hiding. It also offers a violation of proper female domesticity and the same traits that are supposed to make women good botanists. When a woman uses plants or food as poison to subvert rather than maintain the domestic order, she defies her assigned roles of observer, cataloger, and nurturer. Depending on one's perspective, poisoning can be used to warn of or promote a woman's independence.

The 18th and 19th centuries began a fascination with women poisoners. Sara Crosby's book _Poisonous Muse: The Female Poisoner and the Framing of Popular Authorship in Jacksonian America_ in particular tells a captivating story of poison in America. (5) Poison began popping up in fiction as well as in the newspapers, and readers became alternately enchanted with and horrified by the symbol of transgression and empowerment that female poisoning represented. In many detective stories, the domestic poisoner is a jealous wife who offs her husband or a female rival (though Agatha Christie has plenty of husbands poisoning their wives too). Often the use of poison symbolizes female hysteria or jealousy, but it can also symbolize strength — in Phyllis Bottome's 1935 story "The Liqueur Glass," a degraded housewife triumphantly poisons her abusive husband for the sake of her children. (6)

We have Nathaniel Hawthorne's 1844 short story "Rappaccini's Daughter" to thank for the modern association between women, plants, and poison, and for ensuring that fictional botany has little resemblance to that of real life. (7) Of Beatrice Rappaccini, the daughter of a notorious doctor-gardener, the narrator says: "Flower and maiden were different, and yet the same, and fraught with some strange peril in either shape." Beatrice herself does not get to take part in the botanical sciences. Rather, she is locked in her garden, the subject of experimentation by her father: "nourished with poisons from her birth upward, until her whole nature was so imbued with them that she herself had become the deadliest poison in existence." Though her father asserts these qualities make her powerful and special, in the end, love and poison are the Rappaccinis' undoing. This story pairs well with Hawthorne's "The Birth-Mark," another warning not to meddle with the natural order or try to use science to make improvements to women. (8) Hawthorne gives Beatrice the combined power of beauty and poison yet still makes her a victim confined to a limited domestic sphere.

Beatrice also provided inspiration for Poison Ivy, one of the most well-known woman scientist villains in fiction. Introduced by DC Comics in 1966, Ivy, alias of botanist Pamela Isley, often appears as a remnant of the past but also serves as a conduit for change in the way women scientists are portrayed. Especially early in her comics career, she cemented the stereotype of the botanist-poisoner, a woman who cares for her plants as though they're her children (actually cuddling them at times) and who uses her feminine wiles and subtle toxins to get what she wants. However, she also represents a break from tradition in fictional portrayals of women scientists and women poisoners; hardly a passive observer or a domestic victim, Ivy has a PhD in botany and is a brilliant experimenter in her own right. She is also an independent woman whose motives extend beyond mere revenge or romance to eco-terrorism (a relatively honorable pursuit as comic-book villainy goes). At her best, Ivy is an accomplished, albeit evil, scientist with autonomy, intelligence, and a nuanced personality. But though she has done a lot for the portrayal of women scientists, she is far from a good role model, and her work has little resemblance to real botany. She is still overly sexualized, and her popularity also might pigeonhole other women characters — a disproportionate number of sci-fi women scientist villains still use poison as their M.O. Even the CW show _The Flash_ , which for the most part has positive portrayals of women scientists, falls prey to the formula when one woman villain demands that her weapon be something "pretty and toxic, like me."

Clue's Dr. Orchid, who as part of a board game is literally two-dimensional, suggests that modern depictions of women scientists are not all transgressive. Giving the character a PhD doesn't necessarily remedy the issue. The antidote to stereotypes and conventional narratives is portraying women as capable of making real and valuable contributions to science, including in fiction.

### Notes

1 Tina Gianquitto, _"Good Observers of Nature": American Women and the Scientific Study of the Natural World, 1820-1885_ (University of Georgia Press, 2007).

2 Londa Schiebinger, _Nature's Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science_ (Rutgers University Press, 2004) and Ann Shteir, _Cultivating Women, Cultivating Science: Flora's Daughters and Botany in England, 1760 to 1860_ (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999).

3 Elizabeth Phelps, _Familiar Letters on Botany, Practical, Elementary, and Physiological_ (FJ Huntington, 1836).

4 Jane Colden (1724-1766)

5 Sarah L. Crosby, _The Female Poisoner and the Framing of Popular Authorship in Jacksonian America_ (University of Iowa Press, 2016).

6 Phyllis Bottome, "The Liqueur Glass," in _Homefront Horrors: Frights Away From the Front Lines_ , 1914-1918, ed. by Jess Nevins (Courier Dover Publications, 2016).

7 Nathaniel Hawthorne, "Rappaccini's Daughter," in _Mosses from an Old Muse_ (G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1846).

8 Nathaniel Hawthorne, "The Birth-Mark" (1843)

9 See also John M. Riddle, _Goddesses, Elixers, and Witches: Plants and Sexuality Throughout Human History_ (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010); Susannah Gibson, _Animal, Vegetable, Mineral?: How Eighteenth-Century Science Disrupted the Natural Order_ (Oxford University Press, 2015); and Victoria Nagy, "Narratives in the Courtroom: Female Poisoners in Mid-Nineteenth Century England," _European Journal of Criminology_ 11, no. 2 (2014): 213–27.
Gendered Bodies, Disabled Bodies

The essays in this section deal with the ways that bodies are constructed by scientific and political discourse in terms of gender and disability. The science of eugenics pathologizes difference and creates oppressive social and political structures, which is the subject of two essays that were originally published as part of a series on fascism. Some of the essays explore the social theory of disability, which shows how disability is not an inherent fact of bodies rather a set of social and cultural norms that exclude bodies not deemed acceptable. Other essays explore the day to day experience of being a woman in science with a disability and the way our technology for augmenting our bodies often reproduces deep cultural biases.

In "Seducing the 'Feeble-minded," Adam Shapiro shows how eugenics movements in the United States leveraged state power to entrench gendered ideas about morality and sexuality. Joy Rankin lays out the long and complex history of eugenics in the United States in "Eugenics: Policing Everything." Looking at technological systems in "Talking Like a Princess," Meryl Alper traces the way that human biases become embedded in synthetic speech technologies. Jesse Shanahan in interviews a working woman scientist and relates her experience of working in geophysics with a disability in "The Cost of Disclosure: On Being a Woman with a Disability in Geophysics." And lastly, in "Unacceptable Bodies," Anna Reser writes about the social model of disability in relation to an important case study in biomedical ethics regarding reproductive rights.
Seducing the Feeble-Minded

Adam Shapiro

In 1915, Boston school leaders were not happy about George W. Hunter's _Civic Biology, Presented in Problems_ , a biology textbook submitted for their consideration. Word came to the American Book Company's editorial rooms that there was an objection to their textbook's discussion of eugenics, which made use of a recent study of the "Kallikak" family. The textbook traced the Kallikak family to the War of the Revolution, "when a young soldier named Martin Kallikak seduced a feeble-minded girl." (1) It further described the Kallikak family as a "terrible line of immorality and feeble-mindedness" that spanned several generations of degenerate offspring, at a great (and preventable!) expense to society. Hunter's depiction of Kallikak, and the backlash his textbook prompted, illustrates how American eugenics co-opted state power to reinforce gendered views of sexual agency and moral responsibility.

American eugenics took many forms in the early 20th century, from state-imposed sterilization laws to Fitter Family contests to laws restricting immigrants based on race or nationality. In the US, eugenic applications of heredity were often paired with theories of scientific racism to justify appalling treatment of minorities, especially African-Americans and Native Americans. Much of the language of American white supremacy today renews use of these state and social efforts to control the genetic makeup of the country. In some cases, eugenics obscured explicit racist or fascistic applications by giving a veneer of scientific respectability to racist views that were already fully developed. Not all eugenic policy was race-based, but racist and ableist applications of American eugenics were tied to a presumption of state power over the bodies of its citizens.

There are many reasons one could find a discussion of eugenics in a high school textbook objectionable: the dehumanizing advocacy of sexual sterilization and confinement in asylums, the stigmatization of mental disability through terms like "feeble-minded," the discriminatory application of eugenics laws to target people from disadvantaged backgrounds, the unfeeling utilitarianism and threat to individual rights. But what really upset Boston's school masters was the word "seduced." They claimed it was too sexually explicit for high school students. They would not adopt the book unless it was changed.

When confronted by his publisher, George Hunter resisted vociferously, calling his critic "a fanatic on the matter of sex." But the editors urged Hunter to avoid offense, and they pressured Hunter into accepting changes. A revised version of the textbook made reference instead to "the union of Martin Kallikak, a young soldier of the War of the Revolution, with a feeble-minded girl."

Changes to individual words make a huge difference in textbooks. After the Scopes trial, Hunter's editors removed the word "evolution" from the revised version of the _Civic Biology_ over his fierce objections, and the editors successfully got the updated book adopted in Tennessee. Controversies over textbook content have been a recurring part of American educational history, in some cases going back to 19th century debates over portrayals of the Civil War. The political and economic importance of textbook adoptions often results in sacrificing educational context to avoid any possibility of controversy, as historian Diane Ravitch shows in her 2003 book _The Language Police_. (2) In 2015, publisher McGraw-Hill was strongly criticized for a geography textbook that referred to enslaved Africans forcibly brought to America as "workers."

Word choice also makes a tremendous difference in the politics of sexual agency. Whether it's the much-maligned idea of "legitimate rape" from the lips of an American Congressman, or the language of slut-shaming and other rhetorical devices to police women's bodies, silence their words, or imply their own culpability in abuse, the terms used to describe sex and sexuality connote issues of power, ethics, and responsibility.

A February 2017 _Teen Vogue_ article illustrated the insidious politics behind calling enslaved women the "mistresses" of their putative owners. (3) In that case, Lincoln Blades notes that calling Sally Hemmings the "mistress" of Thomas Jefferson" denotes a relationship predicated on mutual choice, autonomy, and affirmative consent—things slaves do not have." Likewise, to say that Martin Kallikak "seduced" this "feeble-minded girl" is to assert something that was too often true and too rarely said of women and girls judged in this era to be feeble-minded: They were victims of sexual abuses rather than perpetrators of immoral sexual behavior.

In compelling this change to the _Civic Biology_ , Boston's school leaders made a similar decision to erase an act of sexual violence against a woman. The publishers saw the school leaders' objection as a (Catholic-led) effort to cut out eugenics. But this particular erasure actually restored a eugenic narrative established when the world was first introduced to the Kallikak family.

"Martin Kallikak" was the pseudonym assigned by psychologist Henry Goddard when he first published The Kallikak Family in 1912. (4) For him, Martin was not a seducer, but rather a "natural experiment of remarkable value to the sociologist and student of heredity." (5) Martin's unique value to science arose because "on leaving the Revolutionary Army, [he] straightened up and married a respectable girl of good family, and through that union has come another line of descendants of radically different character... All of them are normal people." To Goddard, this was proof enough that the fault for generations of "degenerate offspring" lay not with the upstanding soldier, but with the feeble-minded woman. Martin was not only absolved of genetic responsibility for his offspring, he was depicted as morally blameless as well.

In Goddard's book, Martin Kallikak came from a "good family" but lost his father at 15. (6) Goddard invokes militaristic nationalism to engender more sympathy for fatherless Martin, writing, "Just before attaining his majority, the young man joined one of the numerous military companies that were formed to protect the country at the beginning of the Revolution." The patriotic orphan soldier was understandably unable to resist the combined temptations of sex and alcohol: "At one of the taverns frequented by the militia he met a feeble-minded girl by whom he became the father of a feeble-minded son." Kallikak is absolved of any agency; the militia brought him to the tavern.

Just by meeting the "feeble-minded girl," the passive act of becoming a father naturally follows. Writing at the height of the American temperance movement, Goddard excused Martin's "appetite for strong drink" because it "was cultivated at a time when such practices were common everywhere." And the most adverse consequence of Martin's drinking was not his own immoral behavior, but that appetite for alcohol led the soldier boy into the tavern where a dangerous feeble-minded girl awaited. To the extent that Goddard shows any disapproval of Martin, it's for his irresponsibility to the state in siring a line of costly "defectives," not in his sexual treatment of an unnamed girl.

It's not as if Goddard couldn't imagine "sexual immorality." The first Kallikak family member Goddard met, "Deborah," was "the kind of girl or woman that fills our reformatories." (7) They are wayward, they get into all sorts of trouble and difficulties, sexually and otherwise." Even though Martin's behavior was excused by the loss of his father, Deborah "born in an almshouse" to a mother who married the "prospective father of another child" was dismissed as hereditarily incapable of "straightening up" the way, Martin, her great-great-great grandfather did. "The teacher clings to the hope, indeed insists, that such a girl will come out all right. Our work with Deborah convinces us that such hopes are delusions." (8) The "feeble-minded girl" is capable of being a sexual agent—indeed, in Goddard's view, "sexual immorality" was evidence of feeble-mindedness.

Goddard also described the "feeble-minded" Deborah as having the mental age of a 9 year-old. That a girl of 9, or someone intellectually or emotionally equivalent to one, could be seen as the instigator in events leading to bearing a child is appalling. Goddard admits that the state would not hold Deborah responsible for her actions, but asserts that without the asylum, she would "lead a life that would be vicious, immoral and criminal." That these Kallikaks could be judged "sexually immoral" begs entirely the question of whether a woman like Deborah—or her thrice-great grandmother—could act in a knowing and consensual manner.

Sometimes censorship takes the form of direct state control over text. In a fascist society, the needs of the state are often internalized by its citizens, which makes possible the indirect censorship by using economic threats and fear of public reprisal. This isn't political correctness; it's the dictation of a cultural agenda. In this context, naming Kallikak's actions as seduction (while still a euphemism itself) is a radical subversion of gender politics, challenging the idea that "feeble-minded" women were somehow agents of sexual immorality rather than victims of it. Removing this word isn't simply a gesture to linguistic decency; it's imposing a state-sanctioned, socially reinforced view of gender and sex that treats sexual immorality as primarily female, and justifies state control over women's bodies legitimated by appealing to their alleged immoral choice-making.

Roni Dean-Burren, the school parent who brought to public attention the problems with McGraw-Hill's geography textbook, commented that in repackaging the realities of abduction and slavery, "This is what erasure looks like, folks." The politics of erasure were also at work in American eugenics. This matters because the debate over eugenics' legacy is also a debate over sexual and reproductive agency. And American society still equates female sexual agency with immorality, and uses the erasure of male sexual immorality to legitimate political authority.

### Notes

1 George William Hunter, _A Civic Biology: Presented in Problems_ (American Book Company, 1914): 262.

2 Diane Ravitch, _The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict What Students Learn_ (Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2007)

3 Lincoln Anthony Blades, "Why You Can't Ever Call an Enslaved Woman a 'Mistress.' " _Teen Vogue_ , February 27, 2017.

4 Henry Herbert Goddard, T _he Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble-mindedness_ (MacMillan Company, 1912): 116.

5 Ibid., 116

6 Ibid, 1.

7 Ibid, 11.

8 Ibid, 11.

9 See also Adam Shapiro, _Trying Biology: The Scopes Trial, Textbooks, and the Antievolution Movement in American Schools_ (University of Chicago Press, 2013).
Eugenics: Policing Everything

Joy Lisi Rankin

During the Progressive Era, when massive immigration, urbanization, and industrialization transformed the nation and left many of the white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant (WASP) middle-to-upper class reeling, eugenics promised a path to fitter families, so-called racial purity, and renewed national strength. Eugenicists sought to curtail the expansion of American democracy embodied by the enfranchisement of former slaves, women, and new citizens from eastern and southern Europe, Asia, and Mexico. They deployed their science for politically anti-democratic and authoritarian ends.

In both the United States and Great Britain, Eugenics flourished as a science alongside the growth of classical genetics during the opening decades of the 20th century. Indeed, many of the scientists now credited with putting genetics on modern footing embraced eugenics as part of their research programs. Francis Galton, a British scientist and cousin of Charles Darwin's, developed the term to mean "well born" or even "better breeding." Around 1900, renewed attention to the research of Gregor Mendel added steam to the eugenic cause. Mendel's theories of heredity, in which dominant and recessive traits passed along from generation to generation, offered eugenicists and geneticists (many scientists were both) the scientific framework to advocate for the "improvement" of the human species. They aimed to increase "desirable" traits in the population and to decrease "undesirable" traits.

Scientists who studied both genetics and eugenics included Charles Davenport and his Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory, Raymond Pearl and Herbert Jennings of Johns Hopkins, Clarence C. Little, then the president of the University of Michigan, and Edward East and William Castle at Harvard. Many American universities offered eugenics courses, or genetics courses with significant coverage of eugenics. The cereal titan John Harvey Kellogg established the sizable Race Betterment Foundation in Battle Creek, Michigan, in 1906. Nearly a decade later, advocates for race betterment from across the country gathered at the 1915 Panama-Pacific International Exposition in San Francisco.

The American Eugenics Society erected displays at state fairs and national celebrations, such as the national Sesquicentennial Celebration in Philadelphia in 1926, using representations of Mendelian inheritance to promote better breeding and fitter families. One eugenics poster declared,

Unfit Human Traits Such As Feeblemindedness, Epilepsy, Criminality, Insanity, Alcoholism, Pauperism and Many Others, Run In Families And Are Inherited In Exactly The Same Way As Color In Guinea-Pigs. If All Marriages Were Eugenic We Could Breed Out Most Of This Unfitness In Three Generations. (1)

The American Eugenics Society "Eugenic and Health Exhibit" at the 1929 Kansas State Fair presented the ubiquitous "Color Inheritance in Guinea Pigs," a not-so-subtle nod to the social construction and elevation of whiteness in the United States. (2) That same "Eugenic and Health Exhibit" also differentiated between "positive" eugenics, which encourages individuals who were deemed fit and desirable to breed more, and "negative" eugenics, which alternatively encouraged individuals who were deemed unfit to breed less or not at all. These public spectacles brokered the marriage of eugenic science with American civic authority. State fairs and sesquicentennial exhibitions performed American federalism and nationalism, and eugenic goals—fundamentally aimed to curtail participation in American democracy—were embedded in these communal celebrations.

Not surprisingly, one of the main thrusts of the eugenics movement was immigration reform, which led to the 1924 Johnson-Reed Immigration Act. The 1924 Act greatly curtailed immigration from southern and eastern European nations, whose immigrants were viewed in the United States as non-white. The Act yielded increased policing along the Mexican-American border. Immigration from Asia had already been greatly restricted, with similar nativist impulse, prior to 1910.

Policing gender and sexuality were at the heart of eugenics, advancing the authoritarian impulse over individual freedom. Historians including Alexandra Minna Stern, Wendy Kline, and Johanna Schoen have convincingly argued that attention to gender and sexuality recasts eugenic segregation, sterilization, and family counseling as circumscribing the boundaries of heteronormative white womanhood. (3) Eugenics placed the responsibility for racial and family fitness firmly on women, predominantly affluent, married WASP women. They were encouraged to reproduce and provide a nurturing home and family environment, and working women (white or nonwhite) were discouraged from childbearing at all. The former were the "mothers of tomorrow," while the latter, labeled "morons," "symbolized the danger of female sexuality unleashed." (4)

In _Building a Better Race: Gender, Sexuality, and Eugenics from the Turn of the Century to the Baby Boom_ , Wendy Kline analyzes the history of the Sonoma California State Home for the Feebleminded in California to trace the eugenic-inspired shift from segregating "morons" to sterilizing them. She explains,

Initially, eugenicists believed that quarantining the female 'high-grade moron' would prevent sexually promiscuous women from infecting the race. But by the 1910s, promiscuous sexual behavior had spread into the middle classes...sterilization gained popularity as an efficient way to prevent the spread of mental and moral deficiency to future generations. (5)

Ultimately, the state of California performed 20,000 sterilizations, one-third of the 60,000 performed in the nation during the 20th century. Indiana had passed the first sterilization law in 1907, and many other states rushed to jump on the eugenics bandwagon.

The preferences of the privileged intersected with a powerful state sterilization program in Virginia in the case Buck v. Bell, decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1927. The Court upheld the constitutionality of Virginia's compulsory sterilization laws. The state of Virginia wanted to sterilize Carrie Buck on its declared evidence that she was feeble-minded, and that feeble-mindedness was hereditary in the Buck line. Carrie Buck birthed a child (Vivian) out of wedlock because she was raped by a member of her foster family, and the state falsely claimed that Carrie's mother had also birthed Carrie as a single mother. The state labeled Carrie feeble-minded and socially immoral, and sought to sterilize her to further limit the spread of her "undesirable" traits. In his decision, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes conveyed that individual rights had to be sacrificed for the greater public good. He wrote:

It is better for all the world if, instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind... Three generations of imbeciles are enough. (6)

Holmes invoked a common good that was a patriarchal, paternalistic, racist and sexist privilege. Eugenics elevated the authority of a select few, who were WASP men, over individual rights of others.

Herein lies, perhaps, one of the great ironies of the eugenics movement and its legacy. As the historian Daniel J. Kevles articulates, "An unabashed distrust, even contempt, for democracy characterized a part of eugenic thinking in both Britain and America." (7) The priests and proselytizers of eugenics distrusted the democracy that had been slowly expanding to include former slaves, women voters and working women, and immigrants. In their zeal for better breeding, the eugenicists turned their science into a tool of domination. And ultimately, for a time, they turned liberalism to hateful, exclusionary ends.

### Notes

1 "Unfit Human Traits" and "Triangle of Life" posters in the Eugenics Archive, DNA Learning Center (Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory), https://www.dnalc.org/view/11509--Unfit-Human-Traits-and-Triangle-of-Life-.html.

2 "Eugenic and Health Exhibit, Kansas Free Fair, 1929," photograph from American Eugenics Society Records at the American Philosophical Society Library, http://www.amphilsoc.org/mole/view?docId=ead/Mss.575.06.Am3-ead.xml.

3 Alexandra Minna Stern, _Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America_ , paperback ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2015); Wendy Kline, _Building a Better Race: Gender, Sexuality, and Eugenics from the Turn of the Century to the Baby Boom_ , paperback ed. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005); Johanna Schoen, _Choice and Coercion: Birth Control, Sterilization, and Abortion in Public Health and Welfare_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005).

4 Kline, _Building a Better Race_ , 3.

5 Ibid.

6 Opinion of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

7 Daniel J. Kevles, _In the Name of Eugenics_ , paperback ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998), 76.
Talking like a 'Princess': What Speaking Machines Say About Human Biases

Meryl Alper

By default, synthetic speech has historically represented voices emanating from adult, white, male, and cisgender bodies. (1) Machine-generated voices reflect the backgrounds of professionals in disciplines related to speech synthesis, such as engineering, as well as the commercial synthetic voice models that they designed and constructed in the late 20th century. The erasure of women, people of color, and gender nonconforming individuals from the social and technical construction of synthetic speech shapes the identities that computerized voices can potentially convey.

Take one of the world's most pervasive speech synthesis systems: Apple's built-in synthesizer MacinTalk and screen-reading technology VoiceOver. Apple is widely acclaimed for designing robust accessibility features into its operating systems (OS). One of these features is VoiceOver, described by the Apple Developer Speech Synthesis Programming Guide as "an alternative way of interacting with the Macintosh that [...] generates spoken output" and "allows visually impaired users to use applications and macOS itself using only the keyboard." There is a uniformity to the VoiceOver voices exemplified by the Female options that are labeled with mostly Anglo-origin names like "Agnes," "Victoria," and "Samantha," which reinforces white supremacy. But Apple is not alone here. Microsoft's artificially intelligent talking personal assistant Cortana (the company's answer to Apple's Siri) is named after a character from the Halo video game franchise for their Xbox console. (2) Cortana is a thin, presumably cisgender, light-skinned, woman hologram.

There is also a more limited range of VoiceOver voice output options in mobile iOS than Apple's desktop macOS. One of the voice options included in macOS (but not iOS) under the "English (United States)—Female" category is "Princess." Nothing is particularly regal about the voice of "Princess," which has a tinny, underwater gurgle quality. "Princess," as a label, signifies a young age range as opposed to an older queen. Apple's VoiceOver categories also reinforce a gender binary; outside of Female and Male, the only other category is Novelty. Is anything that falls outside of those two genders considered a "novelty" voice de facto?

Although having the only young girl option on VoiceOver be named "Princess" inherently enforces gender essentialism, particularly as there is no "Prince" option, "Princess" also interestingly challenges gender stereotypes. Apple provides samples of each voice in its customization options for system voices, and while one might expect it to say any number of cringe-worthy sample phrases, VoiceOver introduces "Princess" with "When I grow up, I'm going to be a scientist." Creating a synthetic voice involves mimicking both the cultural (e.g., gender norm-based) and biological (e.g., sex-based) characteristics of a person's voice, as well as imagining the content of their speech and the purpose of their speech acts. Princess exemplifies these multilayered characteristics of synthetic speech by sounding both sweet and subversive.

These choices for synthetic voices, or lack thereof, directly and indirectly impact disabled users in myriad ways. For an "accessibility" feature, VoiceOver's Novelty category contains labels for voices that mock individuals with mental health challenges and draw upon gendered tropes of mental illness. Among the labels in the Novelty category is a voice named "Deranged" (which says in its sample, "I need to go on a really long vacation") and another named "Hysterical" (which cries, "Please stop tickling me").

Individuals with significant speech impairments, due to developmental or acquired language disorders such as apraxia or aphasia, who speak using synthetic voices face a double bind. When synthetic speech takes the form of "text-to-speech" (TTS), it vocalizes written content that hearing individuals can listen to. For instance, Siri can tell you where to find the nearest sushi restaurant without having to look it up online. This same technology can aid people who may or may not also have disabilities. A computer, for example, can read aloud for blind users the sushi menu from a webpage as long as that menu is accessible to screen reading software.

With TTS, the text is written by one person and spoken by an inanimate object for a different person to hear. But what about non-speaking individuals with disabilities? Their use of synthetic voices might be more akin to "speaking-to-speech," as the construction of an utterance, phrase, or sentence is context dependent. If we only focus on speaking individuals as the users of synthetic speech, then we miss out its applications to a full range of consumers and needs.

All of this matters because while synthetic speech is often assumed to be an "accessible" technology that enables agency and self-expression, it also simultaneously reproduces and amplifies power imbalances. (3) For my book, _Giving Voice: Mobile Communication, Disability, and Inequality_ , I conducted ethnographic fieldwork among young people with significant speech impairments and found that racial and gender power imbalances manifested in synthetic speech in various ways. (4) It came through in how young women with speech disorders used and creatively misused their more limited range of synthetic voices to communicate, and in how the parents of young non-speaking white boys more often discussed the ease with which they selected a "natural" voice for their child to use.

Much work needs to be done to correct these imbalances. Companies like VocaliD are making strides to crowdsource vocal samples from a more diverse population to create customized synthetic voices beyond the generic few. In _Giving Voice_ , I suggest that it's only by "keeping voices attached to people" that we avoid abstracting notions of voice and automatically equating synthetic speech with agency and empowerment when used by people with speech disabilities. This conceptualization borrows from historian Katherine Ott's challenge to scholars of technology and society to stop abstracting the idea of prosthetics from the lived realities of prosthetic users, and to instead "[keep] prosthesis attached to people." (5) Simply put, technology begets both pain and pleasure for those with disabilities.

Humans craft speech technology that other humans use to speak. Synthetic voice options for anyone except cis white men have historically been limited and complicated. Voice is material and embodied, and even more so in the form of synthetic speech. "Voicelessness" isn't an individual biological trait; being silent or speechless is socially, culturally, and politically shaped. Understanding the gendered politics of speech synthesis through the lens of disability enables us to re-shape the agenda and priorities of speech synthesis and technologies. Speech synthesis should be intersectional and polyvocal, and voices should be engineered and designed by more than just able-bodied cisgender white men. People with disabilities can be agents of change for promoting a more ethical approach to conversational agents.

### Notes

1 Dennis H. Klatt and Laura C. Klatt, Analysis, Synthesis, and Perception of Voice Quality Variations Among Female and Male Talkers," _Journal of the Acoustical Society of America_ 87, no. 820 (1990).

2 Tom Warren, "The story of Cortana, Microsoft's Siri Killer," _The Verge_ April 2, 2014. https://www.theverge.com/2014/4/2/5570866/cortana-windows-phone-8-1-digital-assistant

3 John Brownlee, "Google's Latest Accessibility Feature is So Good, Everyone Will Use It," _Fast Co Design_ May 20, 2016. https://www.fastcodesign.com/3060028/googles-latest-accessibility-feature-is-so-good-everyone-will-use-it

4 Meryl Alper, _Giving Voice: Mobile Communication, Disability, and Inequality_ (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2017).

5 Katherine Ott, "The Sum of Its Parts: An Introduction to Modern Histories of Prosthetics," in _Artificial Parts, Practical Lives: Modern Histories of Prosthetics_ , ed. Katherine Ott, David Serlin, and Stephen Mihm (New York: NYU Press, 2002) 1–42.

6 See also Mara Mills. "Media and Prosthesis: The Vocoder, the Artificial Larynx, and the History of Signal Processing." _Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences_ 21, no. 1 (2012): 107–149 and Schiebinger, Londa, Ineke Klinge, Hee Young Paik, Inés Sánchez de Madariaga, Martina Schraudner, and Marcia Stefanick (Eds.). "Making Machines Talk: Formulating Research Questions." _Gendered Innovations in Science, Health & Medicine, Engineering, and Environment,_ https://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/case-studies/machines.html, (2011-2017).
The Cost of Disclosure: On Being a Woman with a Disability in Geophysics

Jesse Shanahan

A woman scientist faces unique prejudices in her studies and career that are complex, multifaceted, and well-documented. When that same woman scientist has a disability, the obstacles she faces are not only greater in both magnitude and quantity, but her experience is less frequently recognized. For Megan*, a geophysicist at a prominent U.S. university, the cost of a career in science is keeping her disability a well-kept secret. Her tactic is by no means unusual as many disabled women scientists do not disclose their disabilities for fear of having to face yet another institutional bias.

Struggling to flourish despite widespread sexism is a brutal enough battle for women in science. Add the rampant ableism endemic in the scientific community, and this battle becomes a tortuously prohibitive obstacle to success. Furthermore, disabled scientists are already a rarity—just 1% of doctoral students in STEM are disabled. (1) For many disabled women scientists, the price of disclosing their disability (a prerequisite for any workplace accommodations) is too high. (2)

Megan fondly remembers her initial excitement and love for geophysics. She recalls first encountering this branch of physics in high school, and when she returned to it in her undergraduate classes, she was certain she had found both her passion and her career. However, she began to struggle in her final years of university as a yet undiagnosed disability revealed an underlying inaccessibility in geophysics, which is erroneously considered necessary aspects of the field. Geophysics, in particular, is perceived as requiring physical strength, endurance, and geophysicists themselves are stereotyped as outdoorsy, physically able men.

Megan acknowledges that fieldwork is a strong component of geophysics, and in regard to her research specifically, she says that "working outside and being able to connect the data... with the survey location and point of interest features leads to a better interpretation." She further describes the arduous process of trying to meet program requirements without accommodations or answers about the nature of her disability:

I actually ended up doing mostly computational work prior to being diagnosed as I realized that [my disability] was worse with fieldwork, which often took me weeks to fully recover. I was unable to finish a class trip involving fieldwork, but I refused to give up and got creative in getting through the requirements, getting a lot of rest before hand, and working it out with the professor to make up the trip on a Friday, so I had the weekend to rest and recover.

When she was finally diagnosed, she recalls the negative reactions her coworkers and supervisors had to her initial attempts to disclose. Those who knew of her disability were less likely to work with her, which not only limited her opportunities but inhibited progress in her research as well. She describes being seen as a liability and being unwanted—yet another price to openly being a disabled woman scientist. "I already have a bit of a strike against me being a woman in a male-dominated field that requires quite a bit of heavy lifting," Megan says. "I do not wish to have a second strike against me ..."

The negative responses Megan experienced when sharing her disability are an all-too-common element of disclosure. Unfortunately, the standard practice in the U.S. is to require this disclosure before granting accommodations to a disabled student or employee. As a crucial part of any workplace or educational institution, accommodations aim to remove the exhaustive work Megan describes doing in order to meet her program requirements. Ideally, they are intended to counteract the obstacles to a disabled person's success by allowing for alternative strategies, assistive devices, and additional, equal ways to participate.

Although Megan describes being lucky in terms of the helpfulness of her professors, many disabled women scientists are not, as they are already predisposed to receive less help due to professorial sexism. Having those alternative strategies declared a right and be legally protected means a disabled woman scientist is not dependent upon the fortuitous helpfulness of her professors.

However, U.S. universities and workplaces require disclosure—and this disclosure requires diagnosis—before any accommodations are made. Due to the stigma of disability and the pervasive medical sexism that inhibits diagnosis, many disabled women scientists forgo disclosure and struggle in silence. (3) When female patients report pain, they are less likely to be believed by doctors, and their symptoms are more likely to be dismissed as psychosomatic. This delays or even completely prevents accurate diagnosis and treatment. Without a diagnosis and explanation of need by a doctor, women academics of all fields are unable to access critical accommodations and support.

Yet, Megan staunchly asserts that her disability does not inherently prevent her from being a geophysicist. Her disability should not be an automatic disqualification, as her peers seem to think. Rather, she reiterates the importance of her own expertise in managing and accommodating her disability:

What is often not considered is that I know my limits, and, while I often need more rest and to be more careful than others without [my disability], I can manage myself with medication and extra rest before and after fieldwork with no impact on the timeline or quality of the fieldwork being done. Anyone with [this disability] can do work outside, they just need to be aware of the sun and wear hats, breathable clothing that covers up their skin, and sunblock.

And counter to everything her peers and professors believe, "being diagnosed with [this disability] is not the end of all outdoor activities.

This common misperception of geophysics as a field where physical ableness is necessary is not only false but a wholly unneeded hindrance to disabled women scientists. From simple changes like offering gluten free options while camping to more complex steps like better representation in professional societies, Megan effortlessly lists numerous ways that her field could become more accessible, and it all begins with awareness. She explains, "This awareness comes with the broader community realizing that disabled scientists exist in these fields and that we need to work to create a better community of support for them."

She closes her interview with words of encouragement for other disabled women with a passion for geophysics: "Don't let anyone tell you what you can or can't do. Do what you can and come to a balance where you can be happy, healthy, and successful. Don't give up on your dreams..."

Just as Megan rightfully states, the beginning of accessibility for disabled women scientists begins with awareness. The next critical step is dismantling this dangerous assumption that science is done by neurotypical, able-bodied white men. The reality is critically different; scientific research is driven forward by women with learning disabilities, chronic pain, and both physical and mental disabilities. Not only does their experience deserve awareness and recognition but it is living proof that depriving disabled women of opportunities in science is a devastating loss for science as well.

* Name and identifying details withheld to protect identity.

### Notes

1 "Statistics and Facts about Students with Disabilities Pursuit of Degrees in STEM Fields" (University of Delaware, n.d.), http://sites.udel.edu/seli-ud/facts/.

2 See also Jesse Shanahan, "Disability is not a Disqualification." _Science_ , January 22, 2016, 418, and Lydia X. Z. Brown, "Autistic Hoya: a primer on disability and accessibility" (updated October 1, 2016), http://www.autistichoya.com/p/resources.html.

3 Joe Fassler, "How Doctors Take Women's Pain Less Seriously," _The Atlantic_ , October 15, 2015. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/10/emergency-room-wait-times-sexism/410515/.
Unacceptable Bodies

Anna Reser

In 2007, a controversy erupted over a paper in a pediatric medical journal about a set of therapeutic surgeries and drug treatments designed to attenuate the growth and development of six year old Ashley, who had been diagnosed with static encephalopathy. (1) Ashley's parents argued that the treatment would improve Ashley's quality of life by making it easier for them to care for her, and by relieving the discomfort of a functioning female reproductive system. Ashley's uterus and breast buds were removed, and she was given drug treatments to stunt her growth. The case, known as "The Ashley Treatment," has been used by biomedical ethicists to explore many of the issues related to reproductive health and freedom for women with disabilities, and to examine the ethics of how caregivers "manage" the bodies of the disabled women whom they care for.

The main criticism levelled at Ashley's parents was that they authorized drastic medical interventions simply for their own convenience. By arresting Ashley's growth and removing her reproductive organs, they would be saving themselves a great deal of physical labor. Ashley's parents, and the physician who performed the treatment, argued that this type of therapy would prevent Ashley from becoming institutionalized and allow her parents to care for her at home. As for the surgical interventions, Ashley's parents cited the prevention of pain and the preservation of her "dignity." The removal of Ashley's breast buds would prevent the development of her breasts, and as her parents argued, eliminate the risk of breast cancer later in life. A hysterectomy would prevent both menstruation and pregnancy. By removing Ashley's reproductive organs and suppressing the development of her secondary sex characteristics, the caregivers and doctors argued that her body would more closely match her cognitive state, which would remain at the level of an infant for her entire life.

Biomedical ethicists have argued that Ashley's parents can only be considered to have acted ethically and in Ashley's interest if the measures they took to alter Ashley's body were necessary out of a lack of other options and social support. This case goes to the heart of the problems that disability activists and scholars describe as the medical model of disability, which sees impairment and disability as interchangeable. This model casts disability as a factual, physical state of being that is attached to an individual body. It relies on highly articulated modern systems of medicine that focus on the individual pathologization of bodies against an idealized "normal body." This is the fulcrum of modern medicine's diagnostic power. But it has also historically prevented people with disabilities from claiming a coherent political identity; when the medical establishment insists on the individual physicality of disability, it is difficult to form solidarity with people with different types of disabilities.

This model necessarily results in the kind of segregated accommodations that mirror medicine's central normal/pathological distinctions—not to mention racial segregation. In response, disability activists and scholars developed a new framework for understanding disability as a social system of oppression that operates independently from the actual bodies of individuals. In this model, disability is the social exclusion that is imposed on people with impairments. It says that most, if not all limitations, caused by impairment can be removed, not by medical interventions on individual bodies but by altering the social structure in which people with impairments live in order to accommodate them.

I think Ashley's case is actually a difficult one to process through a social model of disability, something that her parent's have attempted to argue. But her case does illustrate some ways in which a medical model of disability, combined with a historical tendency for modern medicine to pathologize the female reproductive body, creates a dangerous situation for women and girls with disabilities.

A briefing paper from 2002 by the Center for Reproductive Rights outlines a human rights framework for ensuring that women with disabilities are treated equally and ethically with regard to reproductive health. The paper details four areas in which measures must be taken to protect women with disabilities: the right to equality and nondiscrimination; the right to marry and found a family; the right to reproductive health, including family planning and maternal health services, information, and education; and the right to physical integrity. The last right of physical integrity encompasses the most serious consequences of the violation of the other four rights. Forced sterilization, forced abortion, the removal of reproductive organs without consent, all have been deployed as ways to control what is seen as the pathological sexuality of disabled women.

In Ashley's case, we can look closely at the language that her physicians and parents use to describe her condition, and the way they perceive the harm they believe they are protecting Ashley from. Coded into this language are assumptions about "normal" bodies, which are derived from the pervasive influence of a modern medical establishment that attaches disability to individual bodies and pathologizes the female body. Ashley's father insists that the treatment would help to preserve Ashley's dignity, but this implies that bodily functions like menstruation are by default undignified. He further describes menstrual cramps as "chronic pain," from which the treatment would protect Ashley. Given the documented difficulty that women face in having their chronic pain diagnosed, the language here stings. More troubling, Ashley's parents' concern about pregnancy, which could only occur through assault, calls up the despicable rape-culture idea that women are to blame for their reproductive capacity in the event that they become pregnant through rape. (3)

The struggle to create equal social environments for people with disabilities is impossible to separate from other issues of identity and equality. Many people with disabilities experience intersecting oppressions based on race, gender, or class. One of the more significant failings of the 20th century disability rights movements was its lack of integration with other identity movements, particularly feminism. Beyond the specific details of individual cases, Ashley's case illustrates that the very language we use to describe and justify medical and ethical decision making comes from and reinforces a culture of medicalization. Key to creating such intersectional identity movements is understanding the ways that professionalized science and medicine have contributed to the pathologization of women's bodies, especially those that function outside what medicine considers the norm—that of an able-bodied white male.

A key part of making the social model a reality for people with disabilities is challenging the medical establishment in a fundamental way. Critical science studies has challenged the scientific establishment's claim on the truth, and in the process, it has shown how bias and even racism and other oppressive ideologies have infiltrated and even shaped scientific inquiry. Medicine must be subjected to the same scrutiny. By interrogating the accepted image of the "healthy" "normal" body, we can see how modern medicine has constructed this body, not in opposition to some "objectively" pathological bodies but in opposition to socially and culturally unacceptable bodies.

### Notes

1 Daniel F. Gunther and Douglas S. Diekema, "Attenuating Growth in Children With Profound Developmental Disability: A New Approach to an Old Dilemma," _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 160, no. 10 (2006): 1013-1017.

2 Center for Reproductive Rights, "Reproductive Rights and Women with Disabilities: A Human Rights Framework," (2002). https://www.reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/pub_bp_disabilities.pdf

3 See also S. Matthew Liao, Julian Savulescu and Mark Sheehan, "The Ashley Treatment: Best Interests, Convenience, and Parental Decision-Making," _Hastings Center Repor_ t 37, no. 2 (2007): 16-20.
The Profession and Women's Work

This section focuses on the unique experience that women have in the profession of science, and the ways that feminism can change the practice of science itself. The following essays examine the practice of science from many angles, including its representation in popular culture. All the essays find the presence of women or feminist theory in scientific practice to be generally disruptive, throwing into sharp relief the institutional structures that have long prevented women from fully participating in the scientific community.

Joy Rankin in "Lady Wranglers" documents the way the British society systematically stripped a notoriously difficult mathematics exam of its prestige as soon as women began outperforming men. In Amanda Barnett's "The Personal in the Professional: a 19th-Century Hangover," she analyses the coverage of women scientists in media and notes the sexist tropes that are still used to tie women's work to motherhood and the home. In two essays, Emma Louise Backe lays out the history of the field of feminist anthropology and its key theoretical concerns. Hillary Mohaupt writes in "Life and Death in Dioramas" about how the important forensic work of Frances Glessner Lee has been devalued by her portrayal as a wealthy, eccentric heiress. In "Healing History: Women and Medicine," Abby Norman documents the usurpation of women's medical knowledge by a male medical establishment. Closing out this section, Anna Reser assesses the possibilities of a feminist turn in the young field of astrobiology in "Toward a Feminist Astrobiology."
Lady Wranglers

Joy Lisi Rankin

After excelling at math throughout elementary school, my eighth grade Honors Algebra teacher—a woman—proclaimed that girls were not capable of the abstraction required by mathematics from that point on. My story was not—and is not—uncommon. (1) Girls and young women are still discouraged from math at all levels, and I've been increasingly curious about where this pernicious idea came from, how people have tried to address it, and why it persists.

I teach an undergraduate senior seminar on Histories of Computing and Gender, in part so that I can begin to answer my own questions. One thread of this gendered story points clearly to Victorian England, and to the University of Cambridge. (2) Cambridge and mathematics were inseparable in the scholarly and popular imagination during the 19th century in ways that were acutely gendered.

I remind my students that gender is not a synonym for women, and that studying gender is not a history of "men versus women." Rather, gender is about how social relationships are structured based on perceived differences between the sexes. I emphasize relationships and perception: gender is about what happens between and among individuals, families, groups, institutions, and even nations. And thinking historically about gender means asking how the boundary lines between sexes were staked out, described, and challenged at particular moments in time. Finally, gender is about signifying power.

The Mathematics Tripos at Cambridge during the 19th century exemplified gender at work. The Tripos was a grueling university examination, lasting hours each day over the course of several days. As scholars, including Andrew Warwick and Claire Jones, point out, the Tripos was not an exam taken only by young men interested in mathematics. It was viewed as essential preparation for life for any middle- or upper-class British boy. The men preparing for it endured hours of rigorous coaching and drilling in memorization, quick problem solving, and different analytical approaches. When they weren't mentally preparing for the exam, they participated in vigorous physical exercise and competitive team sport to strengthen their bodies and their minds.

Indeed, in his book _Masters of Theory_ , Warwick argues that over the course of the 19th century, the associations among Cambridge mathematics, athleticism, and quintessential British masculinity grew to be intertwined. (3) Symbolically, the Tripos was not just an exam; it was a demonstration of manliness. Performing well on the exam assured a young man leadership in Victorian society. To be an upstanding, admired man in England, no matter the occupation, he had to perform well on the Tripos.

The gendered relationship between the exam and the nation was underscored by the public announcement of how each man performed on the exam, in order from best to worst (the "order of merit") and by the publication of those results in national newspapers, which started with the Times in 1825. The men who scored well on the exam were known as "Wranglers." The highest-scoring man was the "Senior Wrangler," the second highest was the "Second Wrangler," and so on.

The Mathematics Tripos represented the power of elite, educated, white, Anglican masculinity in Victorian England. Then women started taking the Tripos. And the relationship between mathematics and gender changed.

Emily Davies, the principal founder of Girton College, the first women's college at Cambridge, was understandably zealous about promoting higher education for women. Thus, she insisted that all of her women students prepare for and take the Tripos. No matter their academic interest or even if they aspired to marriage, Davies pushed all students to the Maths Tripos. The exam represented the culmination of young British intellectual achievement, so for Davies and her students, it became a powerful symbol of potential. Davies reasoned that if her women students performed well on the examination, the nation would recognize that women had a place in colleges and beyond—alongside their male peers.

Yet, for the Girton women, preparing for the Tripos held a different set of challenges compared with the men. As Claire Jones points out in her excellent book _Femininity, Mathematics, and Science, 1880-1914_ , the women entered college generally far less prepared than the men because girls' schools at the time rarely offered the requisite mathematics courses. (4) Similarly, the male coaches, or tutors, for the Tripos rarely wanted to accept female students. Here, the dynamics of gender were displayed again. The identity of a coach was intertwined with the performance of his students: the better they performed, the more exulted and better paid he was. Most coaches were reluctant to tutor the women because the coaches feared that the women's presumably poor results would diminish their social status, which had become intricately tied to their masculinity. When women were coached, they received tutoring for much shorter periods of time than the men, and in a "more gentle style." (5) When women started taking the Tripos on a formal basis in 1882, they were unofficially ranked alongside the men but did not receive degrees.

Despite all of these obstacles and limitations, women began performing quite well on the Tripos. In 1890 Philippa Fawcett, a student at Newnham, the other Cambridge women's college at the time, placed at the top of the order of merit with the highest score on the Tripos that year. Fawcett's score was not officially recognized, while the man with the highest score, though lower than hers, was the "senior wrangler." Philippa's outstanding achievement was celebrated—and sometimes mocked—in the national and international press. In a patronizing statement thinly veiled as a compliment, the Telegraph reported, "This result...removes from our minds one of those lingering doubts which have sometimes interfered with the full and frank admission of feminine superiority." (6)

When women began succeeding on the Tripos, British society devalued the exam. The Tripos lost its symbolic importance as the apex of young masculine virtuosity. As women began earning high places (unofficially) in the order of merit, success on the examination was increasingly viewed as "indicative of hard work and dull minds." (7) Men who still performed well on the examination downplayed their efforts in preparation, while men who performed poorly were excused for their "mathematical creativity and a marked potential for research." (8) When women did well on the Tripos, the result was not that women were considered equals to the men in intellect and reputation; rather, the exam shed its closely-knit gendered associations of masculinity and prestige. When women achieved success on the Tripos, the Tripos lost its symbolic power.

The women who successfully wrangled with the Tripos demonstrated that they could, in fact, do mathematics just as well as any man, if not better. But to contemporaries, the women's success "indicated that the Tripos has been 'dumbed-down.'" (9) Rather than becoming a symbol of success for young British men and women, the Tripos lost its place in the pantheon of British manliness and power. These unofficial lady wranglers had cleared major hurdles, and then society declared that the race no longer mattered.

### Notes

1 Apryl DeLancey, "Girls Aren't Good at Math," _HuffPost_ , updated August 18, 2016, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/apryl-delancey/girls-arent-good-at-math_b_8005068.html.

2 Queen Victoria reigned in Great Britain from 1837 to 1901. During that time Britain amassed a huge global empire. The University of Cambridge, in England about 60 miles or 100 kilometers north of London, is one of the world's oldest universities.

3 Andrew Warwick, _Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003).

4 Claire G. Jones, _Femininity, Mathematics and Science, 1880-1914_ (Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009).

5 Ibid., 24.

6 Quoted in Ibid., 17.

7 Ibid., 29.

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid., 30.
Why Are We Still Talking About the Naughty Nurse?

Jenna Tonn

Why are we still talking about the naughty nurse?

Two things strike me whenever I teach my undergraduate seminar "Women in American Medicine." First, my students, many who have medical ambitions of their own, are shocked by the well-documented history of the medical establishment's discrimination against women, from actively excluding midwives from the bedside in the 19th century to enforcing the criminalization of abortion in the 20th. Second, they are even more surprised that the history of nursing is much more complicated than one might imagine given depictions of nurses in popular culture.

Images of nurses as selfless ministering angels predominated in the 19th and early 20th centuries and were replaced during World War II with representations of sexy pin-up nurses as seen in novels, film, and television. During this period, nursing as a field professionalized and struggled to balance its legacy as gender-stereotyped "women's work" with a commitment to scientific training, technical competency, and authority at the bedside. In this context, nurses had the opportunity to leverage cultural associations between femininity and caregiving to pursue paid employment. But, as members of a feminized profession, they also had to confront grueling labor demands, chronic undercompensation, and devaluation within medical hierarchies.

Nursing emerged from the daily responsibility of women's domestic labor. Historians often point to the Civil War as an inflection point in this history. During the 1860s, white, middle-class reformers like Louisa May Alcott volunteered to serve in poorly equipped, unsanitary military hospitals and returned home to argue that humane medical care could not be delivered without investing in formally training women as nurses. (1)

The historian Susan Reverby has shown that nursing training programs developed in the 1870s and 1880s, many inspired by the methods and ethos of Florence Nightingale. The romantic ideal of the "womanly" trained nurse belied the reality of exploitative labor structures and paternalistic codes of behavior. (2) It is important to note, however, that fissures between nursing ideals and daily practice circulated before the Civil War and outside of trained nursing. For example, Sharla Fett documents how sanitized visions of white women's nursing work on southern plantations obscured the fact that enslaved women performed most of the everyday health work for both enslaved and planter communities. (3) In both cases, women did the dirty work—dosing and administering medicines (often heroic medicines that induced significant effects), cleaning up bodily fluids, providing care at all hours, cleaning and sanitizing instruments, beds, wards, and sheets, and tending to wounds, blisters, and bleeding.

After the establishment of nurse training programs, arguments about class and race emerged within professional nursing communities. Nineteenth-century nursing programs worried about damaging their reputations by admitting young, uneducated, immigrant women. In addition, before the rise of the hospital as the primary site of care, many trained nurses working in private-duty (living and working in a private home) demanded a place at the family dinner table to demarcate themselves from household servants.

In the 20th century, white, middle-class visiting nurses, trained in the latest methods of sanitary reform and home economics, sought to bring the "gospel of germs" to poor, working-class immigrant families, who lived in tenement houses. These nurses envisioned teaching new scientific methods of cleanliness and sick care as part of a larger project of encouraging assimilation into American society. (4)

At the same time, as Dorothy Clark Hine has pointed out, qualified black women were largely excluded from established nurse training programs due to white racism and the racial segregation of healthcare. Instead, they contributed to the development of black hospitals and nurse training schools, which were dedicated to providing medical care to the black community. (5) While traditional gender expectations allowed women to seek meaningful employment as nurses, they also revealed how relationships between women fragmented along racial and class lines.

Images of nurses in popular culture often overlook these complicated dynamics and focus instead on either reifying gender expectations or transgressing them. Since nursing work requires women coming into close, physical contact with male bodies, nurse training programs often included strict codes of conduct (including dress codes) in an effort to prevent personal relationships with patients. (6)

Regulations reinforced ideals of professionalism within the nursing community but did little to stop patients and medical practitioners from sexually harassing nurses. During World War I, depictions of the nurse as an attentive mother, caring angel, and patriotic fighter fortified these established professional norms. (7) Some images, however, traded on nurses' sexual availability, situating questions of sexuality and desire within chaste narratives about love and marriage. (8)

During World War II, nurses were recast as pin-up girls. Barbara Melosh and Beth Linker have argued that popular conceptions of the nurse during this period reveal a new anxiety about the rising status of nurses. Nurses were celebrated for the work they did during wartime at home and abroad. American hospitals reorganized at mid-century to incorporate new technologies and specialty services, such as neonatal intensive care units and rehabilitation wards that relied on nurses' growing technical expertise. (9)

In these settings, high-status nurses provided care for low-status sick, injured, or disabled men, which upended traditional gender roles. Cultural observers responded with novels, films, cartoons, and television shows that featured sexually transgressive depictions of the young, available "sexy nurse" like Margaret "Hot Lips" Houlihan in _M*A*S*H_ or the hardened, spinster "battle-axe" such as Nurse Ratched. (10)

Stereotypes about nurses continue to circulate in popular culture. In conversations with my students, this is most striking in the context of the thousands of "sexy nurse" and "naughty nurse" Halloween costumes available on Amazon. According to Juliet Lapidos, the phenomenon of sexy costumes can be traced to the 1970s when a neighborhood Halloween parade in Greenwich Village converged with New York's gay culture and transformed into an annual gender-bending costume extravaganza. Although these original costumes were homemade, retailers started marketing and selling their own versions in the 1990s and early 2000s. (11)

Scholars are not sure why "ultrasexy" costumes have become so popular among women in the past several decades. Is the gendering of the Halloween costume market informing women's choices? Is dressing like a sexy nurse conforming to male fantasies? Or, are women actively seeking out opportunities to play with personal expressions of sexiness, femininity, and desire? (12) Whatever the reason, naughty nurse costumes are part of a longer history of associating nursing with the sexual objectification of women.

Advocacy organizations like The Truth about Nursing work to challenge these stereotypes. They argue that objectifying nurses undermines the work that women and men do as trained medical professionals, play a role in the underfunding of nursing research and education, and encourage children to associate nursing with low-status "women's work." (13) Along with educating the public about nursing's important role in health care delivery, The Truth About Nursing protests against marketing campaigns like Sketchers' 2004 sneaker advertisement featuring Christina Aguilera as a "naughty nurse." (14) Similarly in 2005, the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario fought against Virgin Mobile Canada's ad campaign that, according to _The American Journal of Nursing_ , "feature[ed] 'naughty nurse' models ready to help young wireless consumers avoid a mock venereal disease, the 'catch,' which represented Virgin's rivals." (15)

In many ways, the circulation of nursing stereotypes mask more complicated stories about the historical relationship between labor, gender, and power in modern medicine. Perceptions of the nurse as an object of interest—whether "naughty" or angelic—serve to distract us from contending with the real ways that professional caregiving remains central to our experiences of health and illness.

### Notes

1 L.M. Alcott, _Hospital Sketches_ (Boston: James Redpath, 1863).

2 Susan M. Reverby, _Ordered to Care: The Dilemma of American Nursing, 1850-1945_ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987)

3 Sharla M. Fett, _Working Cures: Health, Healing, and Power on Southern Slave Plantations_ (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002)

4 Nancy Tomes, _The Gospel of Germs: Men, Women and the Microbe in American Life_ (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998)

5 Darlene Clark Hine, _Black Women in White: Racial Conflict and Cooperation in the Nursing Profession, 1890-1950_ (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989)

6 U. S. National Library of Medicine, The Zwerdling Postcard Collection: Pictures of Nursing, Exhibition: "The Art of Nursing: Romance, Comedy, and Titilation" (https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/picturesofnursing/exhibition5s0.html). [Hereafter: NLM-ZPC]

7 Hal Hurst, "An Angel of Mercy," (N.Y. : Reinthal & Newman, 1915) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101611729) (NLM-ZPC)

8 "Not in the prescription," ([England]: Raphael Tuck & Sons, [between 1914 and 1918?]) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101612295) (NLM-ZPC)

9 Barbara Melosh, _"The Physician's Hand": Work Culture and Conflict in American Nursing_ (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1982); Beth Linker, _War's Waste: Rehabilitation in World War I America_ (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011)

10 "Read the top line - then skip to the bottom!" ([United States]: [Publisher not identified,] [between 1919 and 1952]) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101458809) (NLM-ZPC); "Add a black eye to whatever he's already got!" ([England]: [publisher not identified], [1950?]) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101611532) (NLM-ZPC)

11 Juliet Lapidos, "When Did Halloween Get So Tawdry," _Slate_ , Oct. 28, 2010 (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2010/10/when_did_halloween_get_so_tawdry.html)

12 Stephanie Rosenbloom, "Good Girls Go Bad, for a Day," _New York Times_ , Oct. 19. 2006 (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/fashion/19costume.html)

13 The Truth About Nursing, "Q. What's the big deal about 'naughty nurse images' in the media? I mean, no one believes nurses really dress like that!" (http://www.truthaboutnursing.org/faq/naughty_nurse.html)

14 The Truth About Nursing, "Inject me: Sketchers tries on the stereotypes with Christina Aguilera as 'naught and nice' 'nurse'" (http://www.truthaboutnursing.org/news/2004/aug/skechers.html)

15 New from the Center for Nursing Advocacy, _The American Journal of Nursing_ 105, no. 6 (June 2005): 22.

16 See also Catherine Ceniza Choy, _Empire of Care: Nursing and Migration in Filipino American History_ (Duke University Press, 2003) and Patricia D'Antonio, _American Nursing: A History of Knowledge, Authority, and the Meaning of Work_ (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010).
The Personal in the Professional: a 19th-Century Hangover

Amanda Barnett

"Mother. Neuroscientist. Researcher." These words begin the profile of Dr. Diane Snow, the Honors College's new dean, featured in my institution's newspaper. (1) The dean has a PhD in neuroscience, although she is never given the title of Dr. in the article. She taught the subject and studied spinal cord injuries before making the move to dean. Yet, the first word of her profile has nothing to do with the reason she is being profiled. It is instead a nod to her personal life, a fact that would for a man likely be omitted or at least relegated to the last few sentences. I am neither suggesting that a woman cannot be both neuroscientist and mother, nor that the latter is not important to the dean's identity; I am highlighting that in a profile focused on the professional but beginning with the personal is something that occurs more often for women than for men.

This kind of gender bias is incredibly common. Another profile of this sort, a 2013 _New York Times_ obituary, praised rocket scientist Yvonne Brill's cooking talents and parenting skills over her discoveries in jet and rocket propulsion technologies. In response, Rachel Swaby wrote _Headstrong_ , a book of profiles that focuses exclusively on the professional lives of women scientists throughout history. In the introduction to her book, Swaby lists a number of moments in which scientific achievement was obscured by marital status or parental prowess. (2)

Science is not the only realm where this issue exists. When Corey Cogdell-Unrein won her second Olympic medal at the 2016 Games she was rewarded by _The_ _Chicago Tribune_ with the tweet "wife of a Bears lineman wins a bronze medal today in Rio Olympics." Such gendered reporting inspired _The Washington Post_ to run a story about the inequalities in Olympic reporting and _The Tab_ published a satirical piece titled "Congrats Girl! Fiancé of former Miss California scoops his 25th medal: AKA — if we talked about male Olympians the way we talk about female athletes." (3) The seeming ridiculousness of the latter article points clearly to the gendered disconnect in the ways we talk about the accomplishments of women and men.

Although the student paper did eventually focus on Snow's professional achievements until the last section of the article, that first word cannot be forgotten. It colors everything that comes after. As Swaby's book makes clear, the tendency to highlight the personal before the professional in writing about women is not new nor is it going away—this problem has deep roots in history. This negotiation between a woman's personal life, which was inseparable from the home, and her public persona is a holdover from a time when women were just beginning to be noticed as actors in the professional world. Unquestioned sexism that has been carried over from the past is harmful and insidious, and it continues to keep the identities of professional women linked inextricably to wifehood and motherhood.

For 19th century women, the personal was more public than it was for men. Unlike men, women's personal lives were often seen as inseparable from their public lives. While this link between women and the domestic was a byproduct of patriarchal constructions of labor, women also strengthened this bond. Not only were women challenged in the press for trying to break into the professional world, but many women who wrote autobiographies in the 19th century, especially doctors and social reformers, also made moves that demonstrated that their public lives were sidelined in favor of their family lives. Despite the appearance of more flexible gender roles, these moves have carried over to the 21st century.

Newspaper and magazine articles in the 19th century were likely to link women to the men in their lives, and often referred to them as Ms., even in cases where they had official medical degrees, like Dr. Elizabeth Blackwell. Although many professional women, especially doctors, did not marry, those who did often were discussed as wifely helpers to their husbands instead of equal partners. In an 1869 _American Phrenological Journal_ article praising Elizabeth Cady Stanton, the author chiefly relates the story of her life through the relationships with her father and brother. The writer concludes by making it clear that despite her work on reforms she "has by no means neglected her own domestic affairs." Much of her positive press coverage calls her "womanly," "motherly," and "honorable" before "intelligent," while the men in her circles are labeled "industrious" and "able." Many articles emphasize the femininity of professional women as a counter to the popular 19th century argument that such work made them too masculine to be women.

Women writing their own lives at this time also upheld their feminine status in order to disprove this notion and strive for acceptance into the contemporary social strictures. In the preface to her 1898 autobiography, Stanton claims she will provide the reader with "the story of [her] private life as the wife of an earnest reformer, as an enthusiastic housekeeper,... and as the mother of seven children." (4) While she begins by claiming that the text will be full of domestic bliss, she uses personal details as segues to her reform work, and the bulk of her text deals with her most active years of leadership.

Women in medicine have long written about themselves in similar ways, crafting the representations of their lives to reassure society that they were not abandoning their family or femininity. Harriet Hunt, for instance, titled her 1856 autobiography, _Glances and Glimpses; or Fifty Years Social Including Twenty Years Professional Life_. (5) As with Stanton, Hunt sets the reader up to expect her social life with a bit of the professional thrown in. However, it quickly becomes evident that she makes little distinction between the personal and professional. She uses moments from her own childhood to give parents medical advice derived from her years of treating children. The two pieces of her life continue to be inextricably linked throughout the book.

Of course, autobiography today is a genre that for both men and women intertwines personal and professional details. However, autobiographies written by male physicians in the 19th century, including those of Samuel Gross and Benjamin Rush, usually stop adding abundant personal details after the childhood section. (6) While they may mention a wife or children, they rarely focus on them or make moves to convince the reader they are only doing professional work as an extension of their private lives. There was a gendered delineation of this genre in the 19th century; in writing their lives in ways men did not, women reaffirmed the importance of the personal in their professional lives. It appears that this link has continued into the present, and professional women are still often talked about—and sometimes talk about themselves—according to this tradition.

In the profile, Dean Snow is quoted saying that she is a "mom first." This may be true, but I contend that feeling the need to link oneself to family first and career second is gendered, just as an author is more likely to begin a professional article with a personal fact if the subject is a woman. The two representations are not equal, of course. When a woman speaks about herself she has the agency to demonstrate her identity as she sees fit, and when someone else writes about her they have the power to sublimate professional identity to personal identity with or without the consent of the subject. However, the culturally embedded beliefs about women's roles affect both situations; in Western culture a woman seeking professional power must demonstrate that she is still a woman, which for many women means being a wife and mother.

Despite the opportunities that now exist for women, they are still frequently tied first to their husbands and families and then to their skills and achievements in the public world. What can be done to rectify these issues? Perhaps we should push to include personal details in accounts of men's professional lives. This may be the truest way to represent a life regardless of sex or gender. Adding identity markers such as race and class further complicates the issue and their effects should be explored. Since people are often comfortable pointing out sexist behavior in the past, but have trouble seeing current issues, it is important to provide historical context for problems women are currently facing. Establishing a direct comparison between 19th and 21st century behaviors makes it more difficult to dismiss the insidious and unquestioned unintentional sexism women encounter today.

### Notes

1 Sam Bruton, "Meet Diane Snow, new dean of the John V. Roach Honors College." _TCU360_ , November 15, 2016.

2 Rachel Swaby, _Headstrong: 52 Women Who Changed Science-and the World_ (Broadway Books, 2015).

3 Petula Dvorak "Women Make History but Their Husbands Get the Credit. How Infuriating is That?" _The Washington Post_ , August 8, 2016.; Roison Lanigan, "Congrats girl! Fiancé of former Miss California scoops his 25th medal." babe, August 10, 2016.

4 Elizabeth Cady Stanton, _Eighty Years and More (1815-1897): Reminiscences of Elizabeth Cady Stanton_ (European Publishing Company, 1897).

5 Harriot Hunt, _Glances and glimpses, or, Fifty years social, including twenty years professional life_ (John P. Jewett and Company, 1856).

6 Samuel Gross (1805-1884) was an American surgeon. Benjamin Rush (1746-1813) was an American physician and politician, considered a Founding Father of the United States.

7 See also Carolyn Skinner, _Women Physicians and Professional Ethos in Nineteenth-Century America_ (Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 2014) and Christine Leiren Mower and Susanne Weil, eds., _Women and Work: The Labors of Self-Fashioning_ (Cambridge Scholars Pub, 2011).
Feminist Anthropology Part I

Emma Louise Backe

Compared with other scientific disciplines, anthropology is relatively young—it wasn't until the early 1900s that the fundamental principles of ethnographic fieldwork and theory were conceived and taken up by practitioners. Early anthropology was essentially the study of human difference, although the analysis of cultural variation was often co-opted by colonial regimes hoping to justify the discrimination and dispossession of "primitive" or traditional cultures. As anthropologists distanced themselves from the biological determinism of 19th century ideologies, they adapted more nuanced, contextualized, and reflexive approaches to studying foreign and subaltern communities. Even though Franz Boas is often heralded as the father of 20th century modern anthropology, his female pupils are equally responsible for building the foundations of contemporary sociocultural anthropology and ethnographic fieldwork. (1) During his tenure at Columbia University, Boas trained Ruth Benedict, Zora Neale Hurston, and Margaret Mead—anthropologists who would go on to reshape the intellectual landscape of the discipline and popular understandings of culture and sexuality in the 20th century. (2)

While Zora Neale Hurston is better known for her literary works, she was also the first black woman to graduate from Barnard with a degree in anthropology. Her autoethnographic collection of African American folklore, _Mules and Men_ (1935), and analysis of the spiritual traditions of voudon in Haiti and Jamaica produced in _Tell My Horse: Voodoo and Life in Haiti and Jamaica_ (1938) were essential contributions to the burgeoning field in the early 1900s. (3) Hurston worked with Ruth Benedict when the two were students at Columbia. While the two were both fascinated by the intersections between anthropology and folklore, Benedict is best known for _Patterns of Culture_ (1934), which built upon and embellished Boas's theory of cultural relativism. (4) Benedict argues that the values, traditions, and beliefs of a given community are contingent upon the social context and culture in which patterns are produced, reproduced, and circulated.

Benedict's research was guided by the central principle that anthropology's purpose is to make the world safe for human difference. Yet the kinds of difference that constituted valuable subjects for ethnographic research often elevated the voices and experiences of men. Despite the numerous contributions of female anthropologists, the discipline has largely been dominated by male practitioners and an androcentric orientation to the study of culture. Although anthropology was premised on complicating Western assumptions about the world, and highlighted that the basic categories of social life and culture are subject to a number of creative, multifarious constructions and iterations, ethnographic accounts throughout the early 20th century largely took for granted the fact that interlocutors were male. Perhaps because so many anthropologists were men themselves, access to ethnographic field sites largely occurred through male community members who would then serve as the experts of their social milieu. It was naively assumed that the male cultural perspective was equally representative of the female one. This oversight also stemmed from a surprising unwillingness to ask about matters of sexuality or investigate the gendered dimensions of power and prestige in traditional communities.

To address this gap, Margaret Mead took on the groundbreaking task of pushing anthropologists to critically consider gender and sexuality through her fieldwork in the South Pacific. _Coming of Age in Samoa_ (1928) and _Growing Up in New Guinea_ (1930) were the first of many ethnographic interventions Mead made that precipitated a paradigm shift in Western understandings of sexuality, sexual fluidity, and male and female sexual roles. (5) Mead's work in the South Pacific, which demonstrated that traditional, nuclear sexual relationships between men and women were neither "natural" nor culturally universal, is often praised as helping to precipitate the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

It wasn't until the 1970s, contemporaneous with the second wave feminist movement, that feminist anthropology truly emerged. In her _Feminist Anthropology_ anthology, Ellen Lewin argues that the movement was premised on improving and strengthening women's presence in ethnographic writing. (6) Feminist anthropologists called into question the supremacy of male interlocutors and worked to elevate the voices of female informants. Informed by the feminist impulse of the 1970s when the paradigm of "women in development" still reigned, gender studies was often conflated with the study of women by women. Feminist anthropologists also strived to work across the disciplines to answer enduring questions about the category of gender. Lewin addressed these questions:

Our non-anthropologist political allies—our 'sisters'—had charged us with the weighty task of situating women's oppression cross-culturally. Had women always been oppressed? Were there factors—economic, cultural, historical—that could be shown to influence women's status? How could we go about assessing the status of women cross-culturally.

Feminist anthropology was also applied to the archaeological record to problematize prevailing "man as hunter, woman as gatherer" tropes and reconsider the historical dimensions of our evolution as a species. The desire to understand the role of women across time and between cultures emerged in part from the question of whether women had always been suppressed and subjugated. Anthropologists were especially careful to disentangle the conflation of sex and gender. The importance of cultural contingency and self-reflexivity that informs feminist anthropology also led to a deeper reworking of the presumed relationship between gender and biology. It became clear that what it meant to be a woman, the social construction and performance of femaleness, and the sexual roles adopted by women depend upon historical and cultural context, rather than intrinsic, universal traits of gender.

By the 1980s and 90s, however, feminist anthropologists began to move away from studying women as a unitary category and instead considered and complicated the material, political, economic, and medical conditions within which gender is articulated and mobilized. As Lewin recounts,

Thus the field moved from being concerned with documenting the experience of particular populations—namely women—to interpreting the place of gender in broader patterns of meaning, interaction, and power, not only among those people who are the objects of investigation, but among anthropologists themselves.

During this time period, the ethnographic gaze not only gravitated toward increasingly nuanced subjects of gendered analysis, but also turned inward upon the discipline itself. While some feminist anthropologists began to play with alternative writing styles, like more personalized and poetic autoethnography, others criticized anthropology's failure to internalize feminism's theoretical provocations and possibilities. In "An Awkward Relationship: The Case of Feminism and Anthropology" (1987), Marilyn Strathern lamented the fact that rather than precipitate a radical transformation of the discipline, feminist anthropology was taken up as a niche sub-field, one that was accommodated by other practitioners rather than applied to the discipline as a whole. (7)

More contemporary works of feminist anthropology grapple with the configurations of gender, sexuality, and politics in conservative religious contexts (Abu-Lughod 1986, Mahmood 2005); the medicalization of women's bodies and reproductive health (Ginsberg 1998, Martin 1987, Rapp 2000); and have taken on topics like female genital mutilation (Gruenbaum 2001) and gender-based violence (Das 2007, Merry 2008, Wies and Haldane 2011), which push against some of anthropology's culturally relative ethical quandaries. (8) Donna Haraway's Cyborg looms large as a metaphor for both 21st century feminist anthropology and alternative configurations of what it means to be a woman. (9)

The Association for Feminist Anthropology was founded in 1988, and anthropologists across the four sub-disciplines—sociocultural anthropology, linguistic anthropology, biological anthropology, and archaeology—continue to experiment with ethnographic writing, critique persistent theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of gender, and commit to politically engaged research that assists communities and invests in the struggles of the sub-altern. The scope and breadth of feminist anthropology has increased significantly from the early 1970s during the movement's inception, yet the identity of the feminist anthropologist remains in flux. While gender and sexuality remain crucial themes in feminist scholarship, what it means to be a feminist anthropologist and engage in feminist ethnography remain unsettled.

### Notes

1 Franz Boas (1858-1942) was a German born American anthropologist often credited with pioneering the modern profession of anthropology.

2 Ruth Benedict (1887-1948) was an American anthropologist who developed influential theories of cultural anthropology regarding personality and culture. Zora Neal Hurston (1891-1960) was an American writer, activist, folklorist, and anthropologist well-known for her literary contributions to the Harlem Renaissance. Margaret Mead (1901-1978) was an American cultural anthropologist remembered for her work on the peoples of Oceania.

3 Zora Neale Hurston, _Mules and Men_ (Research & Education Association, 1999); _Tell My Horse: Voodoo and Life in Haiti and Jamaica_ (Harper Collins, 2009)

4 Ruth Benedict, _Patterns of Culture_ (Mariner Books, 2006).

5 Margaret Mead, _Coming of Age in Samoa: A Psychological Study of Primitive Youth for Western Civilisation_ (Perennial Classics, 2001); _Growing Up in New Guinea: A Comparative Study of Primitive Education_ (Perennial Classics, 2001).

6 Ellen Lewin, ed., _Feminist Anthropology_ (Wiley Blackwell, 2006).

7 Marilyn Strathern, "An Awkward Relationship: The Case of Feminism and Anthropology," _Signs_ 12, no. 2 (1987).

8 Lila Abu-Lughod, V _eiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in a Bedouin Society_ , 2nd ed. (University of California Press, 2000); Saba Mahmood, _Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject_ (Princeton University Press, 2011); Faye D. Ginsburg, _Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community_ (University of California Press, 1998); Emily Martin, _The Woman in the Body: a Cultural Analysis of Reproduction_ (Beacon Press, 2001); Rayna Rapp, _Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America_ (The Anthropology of Everyday Life), 1st ed. (Routledge, 2001); Ellen Gruenbaum, _The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective_ (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001); Veena Das, _Life and Words: Violence and Descent into the Ordinary_ (University of California Press, 2006), Sally Engle Merry, _Gender Violence: A Cultural Perspective_ , 1st ed. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2008); Hillary J. Haldane and Jennifer R. Wiles, eds., _Anthropology at the Front Lines of Gender-Based Violence_ (Vanderbilt University Press, 2011).

9 Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century," in _Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature_ (New York; Routledge, 1991), 149-181.

10 For further reading see Ruth Behar and Deborah A. Gordon, eds., _Women Writing Culture_ (University of California Press, 1995); Micaela di Leonardo, _Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era_ (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); and Marjorie Shostak, _Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman_ (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981).
Feminist Anthropology Part II

Emma Louise Backe

Feminist anthropology began in the 1970s not merely to promote a wider paradigm shift in ethnographic research, but to galvanize the discipline into remodeling how anthropologists functioned in the academy and the field. Although feminist ideologies were incorporated into anthropology's postmodern turn, and the work of feminist anthropologists gained purchase outside of the discipline, feminist anthropology was largely treated as the niche province of female practitioners. As Marilyn Strathern writes, "a milieu of tolerance has also reduced feminist scholarship to just another approach, one way among many into data [...] Feminist anthropology is thus tolerated as a specialty that can be absorbed without challenge to the whole." (1) Strathern laments that while feminist anthropology had the potential to transform the way anthropologists thought about themselves and their interlocutors, it did not initiate the sorts of changes or disciplinary reconfigurations many hoped and longed for.

The "accommodation" of feminist anthropology has meant that one ethnographic research area in particular has remained notably under-researched and unacknowledged: gender-based violence (GBV). In their attempts to advance more nuanced and contextualized understandings of human culture, anthropologists have avoided imposing ethical standards on ethnographic communities. Notions of morality are not universal and often depend upon the religious, social, and cultural milieu of a community. Without absolving acts of violence or harm, anthropologists attempt to provide a complex framework, through which to conceptualize and understand different sets of norms and ideals. Many anthropologists work in marginalized communities whose sense of political, economic, or social instability may result in participation in occult economies, gang activity, or drug use as modes of survival.

Ethnographers are also wary of the politics of representation—anthropologists are careful not to fall into the trap of the spectacle of suffering and violence. In representing another group's life world, anthropologists do not want to unintentionally recapitulate stereotypes or turn their ethnographic field site into a voyeuristic exhibition. Perhaps in part due to the hesitancies and the ethical quandaries elicited by studying violence, very few anthropologists have explicitly studied gender-based violence.

Madelaine Adelman was one of the first anthropologists who attempted to understand the factors that contribute to gender-based violence. In her 2004 article "The Battering State: Towards a Political Economy of Domestic Violence," Adelman drew connections between domestic violence and poverty in the United States, indicating that the political disenfranchisement of women (particularly poor women) and the country's economic structures needed to be taken into account when studying "private" violence in the home. (2)

Adelman's work built upon that of Paul Farmer, whose 1996 research on HIV and AIDS in Haiti is framed around the concept of structural violence. (3) Structural violence refers to the formal and informal institutions that affect an individual's agency and ability to exercise certain rights. Farmer's ethnography includes the stories of young women in Haiti whose families have lost their jobs, whose homes are displaced by the construction of a dam, and who are offered little recourse for economic empowerment or social mobility—except to engage in risky sexual relationships for money and social support, a phenomenon often referred to as survival sex.

More recently in her 2009 book _Gender Violence: A Cultural Perspective_ , Sally Engle also addressed sexual violence through an anthropological lens:

[I]nterpersonal gendered violence and structural violence—the violence of poverty, hunger, social exclusion, and humiliation—are deeply connected. It is impossible to diminish violence against women without reducing these other forms of violence and injustice. (4)

Merry, like Adelman and Farmer, situates gender-based violence within cultural contexts and along continuums of the kinds of violence that occur symbolically, politically, and socially, which depends upon on a person's intersectional position in society.

Most anthropologists who study gender-based violence tend to focus on issues of rape and sexual assault in war or conflict settings. Yet, over the past ten years, anthropologists have begun to turn their attention towards the structural conditions that precipitate violence or undermine the needs of survivors in domestic settings. Sameena Mulla's fieldwork in Baltimore centers on the caregiving dynamics of forensic nurse examiners and survivors of sexual violence seeking rape kits. (5) Jennifer Wies studies the bureaucratic obstacles to justice for survivors of campus sexual assault through university administration and the Title IX Office. (6)

Despite the prescience of this research, however, anthropology has yet to acknowledge the problem of gender-based violence among practitioners themselves. This gap was thrown into sharp relief in the winter of 2016 when a research assistant accused Brian Richmond, a former curator for the American Museum of Natural History and paleoanthropology professor at George Washington University, of sexually assaulting her in his hotel room in Florence, Italy. The sexual assault allegations brought against Richmond shocked many, but also revealed the discipline's inattention to the safety considerations associated with fieldwork.

Indeed, in an anonymous survey of academic fieldwork experience released in 2014, 64% of respondents reported experiencing sexual harassment in the field. 47.9% of the respondents identified as anthropologists. More than 20% of the participating female bioanthropologists reported having experienced physical sexual harassment or unwanted physical contact at a previous field site. Most perpetrators were identified as colleagues of superior professional status or peers. Few of the participants in the survey knew of any workplace policies or mechanisms for reporting associated with harassment, and only 18% of those who reported were satisfied with the results. These statistics are particularly jarring given that fieldwork is a central component of an anthropologist's career.

The gender dimensions of safety and vulnerability in the field should not be lost on anthropologists, and yet, there is a systemic misconception that gender-based violence can't happen to or be perpetrated by anthropologists. In an autoethnographic essay of her own experience of sexual assault, Eva Moreno writes that if an anthropologist experiences violence in the field, they are blamed. (7) Similarly, Mingweig Huang recounts her advisor's suspicion and skepticism about Huang's decision to write about her rape at the hands of an interlocutor, also noting the victim-blaming that followed her disclosure. (8) Amy Pollard's study of stressors associated with fieldwork found that many female anthropologists feel physically unsafe or harassed at their sites, but they are afraid to report for fear of being perceived as a bad ethnographer. (9) Just as Marilyn Strathern expressed disappointment that feminist anthropology did not promote more internal conversation and self-reflexivity, Moreno pushes further, arguing,

[A]nthropology has yet to come to terms with the fact that anthropologists are themselves gendered [...] For female anthropologists, one of the consequences of the fictitiously 'gender-free' life we lead at university is that, if we bring up issues that are specific to us as women in the academic context, we run the risk of doing damage to our identities as anthropologists.

Part of this misrecognition of gender has meant that anthropologists have not been given a space to discuss the possibility of sexual assault in the field. As Eva Moreno says,

As far as the danger of sexual violence is concerned, it may be part of a woman's daily life, but it is not seen to be relevant to the professional part of ourselves—the 'anthropologist' part. 'Anthropologists' don't get harassed or raped. Women do.

This myopia seems to stem from the assumption that if you study anthropology and are trained to attend to the politics of privilege and power, then you are incapable of perpetrating violence. Disciplinary oversight regarding sexual violence harkens back to the problematic dichotomy of "us" and "them" that infuses studying communities outside of your own. Although anthropologists take pride in the difficulty of fieldwork, few programs discuss the role of mental health in the field, develop safety plans for students, or equip ethnographers to handle the emotional contingencies of fieldwork.

After news of the allegations against Richardson broke, the American Association of Physical Anthropologists issued updated statements on sexual harassment and assault and the American Anthropological Association reiterated their "zero tolerance policy" for sexual harassment. Also in response, George Washington University is currently developing and training a cohort of Peer Advocates to work with the University's Title IX Office to field reports and disclosures, provide support to individuals experiencing harassment, and implement training modules for students, staff, and faculty members alike.

The issue of sexual violence in academia is not unique to anthropology—departments around the country have begun to reckon with the phenomenon. Unfortunately, female students and students of color tend to bear the brunt of unwanted sexual advances and contact along a broader continuum of benevolent sexism that still pervades higher education. Responsibility, however, should not fall to students; mechanisms of accountability need to come from those in power, those whose careers aren't at risk from reporting. As Mingweig Huang writes, even among feminist ethnographers, rape still remains unspeakable—"Sexual violence during fieldwork is a reality we should be talking about."

### Notes

1 Marilyn Strathern, "An Awkward Relationship: The Case of Feminism and Anthropology," _Signs_ 12, no. 2 (1987).

2 Madelaine Adelman, "The Battering State: Towards a Political Economy of Domestic Violence." _Journal of Poverty_ , no. 8 (2004): 45-64.

3 Paul Farmer (1959- ) is an American anthropologist and physician

4 Sally Engle Merry, _Gender Violence: A Cultural Perspective_ , 1 ed. (Wiley-Blackwell, 2008).

5 Sameena Mulla, _The Violence of Care: Rape Victims, Forensic Nurses, and Sexual Assault Intervention_ (NYU Press, 2014).

6 Jennifer R. Wiles, "Title IX and the State of Campus Sexual Violence in the United States: Power, Policy, and Local Bodies." _Human Organization_ 74, no. 4 (2015).

7 Eva Moreno, "Rape in the Field: Reflections of a Survivor." _Taboo: Sex, Identity and Erotic Subjectivity in Anthropological Fieldwork_ (Routledge, 2003), 219-250.

8 Mingwei Huang, "Vulnerable Observers: Notes on Fieldwork and Rape." _Chronicle for Higher Education_ , October 12, 2016.

9 Amy Pollard, "Field of Screams: Difficulty and Ethnographic Fieldwork." _Anthropology Matters_ 11, no. 2 (2009).

10 See also Alix Johnson, "The Self at Stake: Thinking Fieldwork and Sexual Violence," _Savage Minds: Notes and Queries in Anthropology_ (blog), March 16, 2016, https://savageminds.org/2016/03/16/the-self-at-stake-thinking-fieldwork-and-sexual-violence/; Torres M. Gabriela, "The Prominence of Consent," Anthropology News, 2016; and Naomi Quinn, "What to Do About Sexual Harassment: A Short Course for Chairs," A _merican Anthropological Association: Advancing Knowledge; Solving Human Problems_ , n.d.
Life and Death in Dioramas

Hillary Moses Mohaupt

When Frances Glessner Lee died in 1962, _The New York Times_ obituary called her "a great-grandmother who became an authority on crime" and "a wealthy widow with a consuming interest in real-life mysteries." (1) The obituary goes on to note that Glessner Lee was named a police captain in 1943, at the age of 64, and served as the New Hampshire state police department's educational director. But this was only part of her story. In other publications during her lifetime and since, she has been framed as an elderly heiress first and a criminology mastermind second, if at all.

Billed by many as "the godmother of forensic science," Glessner Lee is often overshadowed by the grotesqueness of her primary teaching tool, a series of dollhouse-sized dioramas called The Nutshell Studies of Unexplained Death. The dioramas were designed to teach investigators how to observe a crime scene, and they transformed the way investigators approached crime. However, they also contributed to the belief that Glessner Lee was merely an elderly woman applying a feminine hobby to a worthy cause.

Born into a wealthy family in Chicago in 1878, Frances Glessner was educated at home with her brother. While her father was an executive with International Harvester, her mother was an accomplished craftswoman who hosted a Monday morning reading class, which went on for decades, with the wives of University of Chicago professors and other women. At 19, Frances Glessner was presented to society, and three months later she was married to Blewett Lee, a distant relative of General Robert E. Lee.

The marriage was rocky, and her son later blamed his parents' divorce on her "creative urge coupled with high manual dexterity—the desire to make things—which [Lee] did not share." Like her mother, Glessner Lee was interested in crafts. She began making dioramas in childhood, a craft that crystallized in 1913 with an elaborate and intricate study of the 90-member Chicago Symphony Orchestra, a birthday gift for her mother. It was only after her divorce in 1914 that she channeled her early interests in handcrafts and criminology into a career.

Her brother's classmate George Burgess McGrath, the chief medical examiner of Suffolk County in Boston, introduced her to the field of forensic science, which at the time was very new and very unmethodical. At age 52, she inherited her family's fortune in 1930, and soon went about making her own way in the world. In 1931, she endowed Harvard University's department of legal medicine (the first of its kind in North America), and in 1934, she donated a library to the department. Two years later, she endowed a department chair and in 1945 she founded the Harvard Seminars in Homicide Investigation. Through the years, she assumed a traditionally feminine role as a conscientious hostess at banquets for young men learning to glean answers from the clues left at the scenes of the crime.

The Nutshell Studies, however, are her best-known legacy. "Convinced that death investigations could be solved through the application of scientific methods and careful analysis of visual evidence," Glessner Lee created at least 20 dioramas of domestic scenes of unexplained death. (2) Each diorama, based on a real New England crime, was built at a scale of one inch to one foot and framed like tiny houses. A diorama often took months to create, with working doors and electricity, and sometimes they cost as much to build as a full-sized house. Each one was intricately detailed down to water stains under sinks and hand-burnt cigarette butts. She even hand-knit stockings for the victims using straight pins.

They are dollhouses, but they are not toys.

Policemen would be given 90 minutes to observe the diorama, note the details, and determine what happened. The first diorama was given to Harvard's Legal Medicine department in 1943, and when the department closed in 1966, they were given to the Maryland Medical Examiner's Office, where they are still used in trainings.

In 1952, Glessner Lee published an article in _The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_ , which traced the history of the department she funded. (3) She details the tools she used, the goals of the department, its surprises and successes—like the Harvard Associates in Police Science, an alumni group of her seminars. She also explains why she built the Nutshell studies:

They are intended to be an exercise in observing, interpreting, evaluating and reporting — there is no 'solution' to be determined. One of the essentials in the study of these Nutshells is that the student should approach them with an open mind—far too often the investigator 'has a hunch,' and looks for and finds only the evidence to support it, disregarding any other evidence that may be present.

Later she writes, "The writer has made every effort to provide the police students with the most modern and progressive scientific training possible to procure for them."

Crime writer Erle Stanley Gardner wrote, "A person studying these models can learn more about circumstantial evidence in an hour than he could learn in months of abstract study." For every precise and meticulous detail that could be a clue to solving a crime that had been committed in real life, there was a carefully rendered detail deriving from Glessner Lee's brilliant mind. The dioramas were imagined, but that didn't make them any less useful in teaching policeman how to observe and interpret the facts.

Fiction writer Kellie Wells was inspired by Glessner Lee and the dioramas, which figure into Wells's novel, Fat Girl, Terrestrial, about a giant who is also a crime scene miniaturizer. Wells says, "One of the things that's so arresting about the dollhouses is the way they put innocence in conversation with villainy... That's part of the studies' power, of course, that they use an object that has been a symbol of childhood/girlhood to tell a malevolent story."

Wells sums Glessner Lee up as "fierce," but William Tyre, the director of Glessner House, the museum of her childhood home, prefers to think of her as "pragmatic."

"People often view the Nutshells as odd and quirky, and don't fully understand just how important they were in training police officers in how to investigate crime scenes," Tyre says. "In her writings, she talks about her successes in revising the standards and requirements for police officers and medical examiners ... There were few, if any, in most states prior to her entering the field, and her work was transformative."

While the models helped medical examiners and other investigators to approach crime scenes methodically, the endowments to Harvard's legal medicine department allowed the university to lead the movement to train medical examiners. As Margaret Rossiter's _Science at Harvard_ attests, to be part of the sciences at Harvard was to take part in the most important scientific institution of the early 20th century. And forensic science was quite different from home economics—the only field in which a woman in first half of the century could hold a full professorship, according the Rossiter. (4)

The dioramas and the banquets and seminars that she organized were work, not merely a "hobby" or "obsession." She became a professional by developing best practices that still guide the field today. (5) Her professional trajectory in some ways follows the path of other women in science who performed invisible, scientific work in domestic spaces. But she tried to escape the confinements of her identity as a well-to-do matron through her own wealth as well as through the use of a traditionally feminine tool that, as Laura Miller writes, usually taught young girls how to manage a home. (6) "Frances Glessner Lee, like all women historically, was underestimated," Kellie Wells says. "And there's something very subversive about this method of getting people to sit up and take notice of the brilliance of her mind and her gift for ratiocination." Perhaps surprisingly, the combination of her gender, age, and traditionally feminine education placed her in a unique position to contribute to forensic science.

Frances Glessner Lee has been called the "godmother of forensic science," referring to the endowments she made to the legal medicine department at Harvard. The term conjures the image of a little old lady granting children's wishes, but there's more to her than that. As Wells says, "Beneath that harmless looking exterior of the grandmotherly dowager is the sharp intellect and formidable powers of observation that could zero in on meaningful details grizzled homicide detectives were missing."

### Notes

1 Obituary of Frances Lee, _The New York Times_ , January 28, 1962.

2 Laura J. Miller, "Dentured Domesticity: An Account of Femininity and Physiognomy in the Interiors of Frances Glessner Lee," in _Negotiating Domesticity: Spacial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture_ (Routledge, 2005), 196–213, 202.

3 Frances Glessner Lee, "Legal Medicine at Harvard University," _The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_ 42, no. 5 (1952): 674-678.

4 Pete Martin, "How Murderers Beat the Law," _The Saturday Evening Post_ , December 10, 1949; Clark A. Elliot and Margaret Rossiter, _Science at Harvard University: Historical Perspectives_ (Associated University Press, 1992), 14. Margaret Rossiter, W _omen Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940_ (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984), 70.

5 Erika Engelhaupt, "Peek Into Tiny Crime Scenes Built by an Obsessed Millionaire," _National Geographic_ , August 8, 2016. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/08/glessner-lee-miniature-crime-scene-analysis/

6 Laura J. Miller, "Frances Glessner Lee: Brief life of a forensic miniaturist: 1878-1962," _Harvard Magazine_ , September-October 2005. https://harvardmagazine.com/2005/09/frances-glessner-lee-html; Miller, "Denatured Domesticity," 202; and Donald L. Opitz, Staffan Bergwik, and Brigitte Van Tiggelen, "Introduction," in _Domesticity in the Making of Modern Science_ (Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 3.

7 See also Kellie Wells, _Fat Girl, Terrestrial: A Novel_ , 1st ed. (Fictive Collective 2, 2012).
Healing History: Women in Medicine

Abby Norman

Discrimination toward women in the medical arts can be traced back to the story of Agnodice. Some scholars argue that she was not a real person, but rather a well-constructed myth. Whether lore or not, her story has been held tight by midwives for millennia. As the story goes, Agnodice had been determined since her youth to aid women in their childbearing—a task that for much of human history fell to female relatives or wizened old women. Facing young Agnodice in Ancient Greece was the problem that women had been completely blocked from studying, let alone practicing, medicine, which included the somewhat mysterious witchery of midwifery.

Women have guided each other through the various stages of reproductive life for centuries and across cultures. They proceeded fairly uninterrupted in these tasks until the 1800s when the fears of men lent themselves to the systematic pathologizing of women's health. As much as it is today, driving women out of those sacred healing roles and blocking their access to medical knowledge was motivated in large part by worries men harbored about the fate of their lineage. By controlling not just the profession of medicine itself but the dissemination of medical knowledge, men were able to exert more precise control over women in order to mollify their deepest progenic concerns. The marginalization of Agnodice provides a useful entry into understanding the long history of medicalization in the Western tradition.

According to the legend, Agnodice entered medicine some 2,000 years ago by dressing as a man to circumvent the restrictions of her gender. In order to gain the trust of her female patients, she would undress enough to prove to her prospective patients that she was, indeed, a woman. As her reputation grew, she quickly became the most in-demand physician of her era.

This, of course, brought her undue attention, and the broader medical community became suspicious of her success. Male physicians were so threatened by this new doctor that they accused him of seducing women. In court, Agnodice then revealed herself to be female to disprove the accusations of lewdness, only to then be tried for breaking the law that prohibited women from studying and practicing medicine.

As the story goes, Agnodice did not back down, and she was victorious in her case. After her trial, women were allowed back into the dominion of midwifery, and doors began to open for them throughout other medical disciplines as well. But, it wouldn't be the last time that men in the upper echelons of the medical establishment would seek to debar women from the vocation.

The feminine hegemony of early gynecology in the Western World began to break down at least since since the time of Hippocrates. He barred women from studying medicine under his tutelage—with the exception of one of his satellite schools in Asia Minor where they were allowed to study gynecology. Men sought to medicalize pregnancy, childbirth, and other aspects of women's health as they feared what would happen if women had enough information, support, and resources to have agency over their reproductive health. The biggest threat being the intentional—or unintentional—bearing of illegitimate heirs.

Pressure on women to produce male heirs was often so intense that it was common for them to employ desperate measures to ensure a male heir. In the British monarchy alone, records show innumerable examples of "royal bastards," illegitimate children of the Royal family going as far back as the Middle Ages. Purportedly, at least one of them had been snuck into the bedchamber in a warming pan after his mother, desperate to produce a royal heir, either had suffered a stillbirth or feigned a pregnancy. Male heirs inherited not just titles but also property, assets, and the family trade. If a woman wanted to profoundly upset a man's life, producing an illegitimate heir would be one way to do it.

Midwifery predates obstetrics by thousands of years, and it gave rise to the discipline in name (obsterix being the Latin for midwife) and in practice. The two were inextricably linked, and fairly interchangeable, until about the 20th century, when another wave of medicalization of childbirth took hold.

In the 17th century, men were successful in their attempts to infiltrate midwifery when "male midwives" or "accoucheurs" started cropping up in France. (1) A few of these men pioneered techniques for delivering breech babies and suturing perineal tears that are still in use today, but it wasn't until the accoucheurs reached Great Britain that their foray into midwifery became permanent. When men achieved control in both the academic and clinical sense, women lost what little control they had in reproductive medicine as both patients and practitioners.

In the U.S. and many other industrialized nations, childbirth has become regarded as an emergent medical event, an interpretation of childbirth that is still in its infancy. Whereas midwifery often includes options like home birth or unassisted birth, obstetrics aimed to prove that childbirth was a medical event best undertaken in a hospital under the watchful eye of a male physician. As the two practices diverged, academic and clinical obstetrics become a space for men to exercise their power and prowess, while midwifery remained largely in the hands of women. Today, they represent two distinct—but potentially complementary—approaches to pregnancy and childbirth.

The creation of the obstetric discipline provided a means for men to enter the formerly woman dominated field that was reproductive health. However, the medicalized approach to childbirth, which, among other practices, included the hospital births and Twilight Sleeps of the early 21st century, did not provide a comparable opportunity for women to gain entry into medicine as a whole. (2) It took centuries, but women slowly began to reclaim their space in more "feminine" disciplines of medicine: today, 60% of pediatricians and 51% of OBGYNs are women. (3)

It would seem that the unique attributes and offerings of women have prevailed in spite of oppression in the world of medicine. Recent research from Harvard shows that in a review of over a million patient records, patients who were treated by women physicians had lower readmission rates, better outcomes, and a statistically significant lowered risk of dying. (4)

Women appear to have a firmer grasp on the ultimate objective of medicine: to heal. Throughout history, women have been regarded as natural healers, alternatively feared and revered for their curative powers. Women have oft been thought to possess innate prowess for healing, nurturing, and caretaking. To forsake these 'maternal' roles is, even today, regarded as irreverence. Therein lies a great irony; the very proclivities for nurturing and healing that women have harnessed to position themselves for success in the medical field are also the very traits that can undermine that success. The responsibilities of motherhood have been pitted against the demands of a woman's career for as long as they have attempted to wrangle both—a narrative that doesn't seem to leave any room for the possibility that the two could ever achieve symbiosis.

When women can thrive they become powerful. The power to heal, in particular, has not been viewed equally as it manifests in men and women; men who demonstrated an ability to heal were revered as physicians, while women were hunted as witches or dismissed as quacks. Men's biggest concerns about women having agency over their own reproduction stem primarily from their distrust of women in general, who they suspect of having ulterior motives. Agnodice, like many women who came after her, were inspired to approach reproductive medicine as a profession not because they wanted to destroy men, but because they wanted to save women.

Women physicians are like Agnodice, often eschewing their femininity, which they know is an asset, but that the world sees as an impediment. When masquerading as a man, Agnodice's success was so beyond the precedent that men had set, it bred suspicions of salacious behavior. The women physicians today mastering patient communication and preventative medicine are healing despite the gender politics that stand in their way, meant to devitalize and hinder their success.

### Notes

1 J. Drife, "The start of life: a history of obstetrics." _Postgraduate Medical Journal_ 78, no. 919 (2002): 311-315.

2. A. Smith, T _wilight sleep in America: The Truth about Painless Childbirth_ (Victoria Pub Co., 1915).

3 Lyndra Vassar, "How medical specialties vary by gender." _AMA Wire_ , February 18, 2015.

4 Yusuke Tsugawa, Anupam B. Jena, Jose F. Figueroa, et al, "Comparison of Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates for Medicare Patients Treated by Male vs Female Physicians." _JAMA Intern Med_ 177, no. 2 (2017): 206-213; James Hamblin, "Evidence of the Superiority of Female Doctors." _The Atlantic_ , December 19, 2016.

5 See also Atul Grover, "The Good and Bad Statistics on Women in Medicine." _The Wall Street Journal_ , October 29, 2015 and Aditi Ramakrishnan, Dana Sambuco, and Reshma Jagsi. "Women's Participation in the Medical Profession: Insights from Experiences in Japan, Scandinavia, Russia, and Eastern Europe." _Journal of Women's Health_ 23, no. 11 (2014): 975-934.
Toward a Feminist Astrobiology

Anna Reser

A little over halfway through Marc Kaufman's _First Contact: Scientific Breakthroughs in the Hunt for Life Beyond Earth_ , the recently disgraced exoplanet hunter and serial sexual harasser Geoff Marcy makes a brief cameo as an intrepid scientist about to embark on the research that would make him famous. (1) I followed the revelations of Marcy's decades-long campaign of sexual misconduct with disgust last year, and I reacted viscerally to seeing his name in Kaufmann's innocuous recounting of the adventurous work of astrobiology pioneers. (2) Written in 2011, four years before the sexual harassment scandal broke, Marcy appears in Kaufman's book as simply another character in a cast of relatively charismatic researchers all working in the loosely conglomerated interdisciplinary field of astrobiology.

Astrobiology, the study of the origin and characteristics of life on earth and its possible existence elsewhere in the universe, is highly interdisciplinary, and it incorporates methods and models from a variety of different sub-disciplines. It began to emerge in its present form, stripped of much of the slightly science fictional qualities that had previously marginalized the search for extraterrestrial life, in the mid to late 1990s.

Kaufman's journalistic approach to narrating astrobiology's story mirrors much of the contemporary science writing in that it spends no time at all on the embedded dynamics of power and gender that we know are foundational to all sciences. The style of the book effects a smoothing and leveling, which places all the players on the same field and positions any conflict squarely around the interpretation of data. A truly ideal scientific origin story that completely lacks petty human constructions.

Part of the reason for the lack of criticality in _First Contact_ has to do with the nature of the so-called "hard" scientific sub-disciplines that make up astrobiology. There seems to be few objects of study in astrobiology to which gender or power might affix itself. Astrobiologists of various stripes study caves, rocks, searing thermal vents in the ocean floor, meteorites, and planets whose existence is sometimes the most we are able to know about them. Moreover, the current form of astrobiology departs from its ancestral "exobiology" in that the field mostly agrees that any life detected in space will be microbial and, thus, not intelligent or even sentient. And regarding the practices of scientists themselves, the long-held and increasingly dangerous assumption that scientists are above such subjectivities seems to hold.

But I know better because I visited this book from the future where everyone knows what Geoff Marcy did. For the determined feminist killjoy, there's always a way in.

While the work of astrobiology may look less science fictional than its disciplinary predecessors, its aims are as lofty as ever. Its central questions overlap significantly with the foundational questions of all sciences: What is life and how can we recognize it on other worlds? Are we alone in the universe? Why is there something rather than nothing? This gives astrobiology incredible institutional clout as well as making it extraordinarily attractive to the public. Astrobiology's most famous practitioners are illuminated by the blinding glow of its ambitious research program.

This blinding glow is part of the reason why Geoff Marcy's ongoing sexual harassment went unreported for so many years. In addition to the license that always seems to accompany men's fame and professional accomplishments, his victims were unwilling to report his crimes because his position in the field and as their mentors gave him incredible power over their careers. Marcy's ability to harass his students and colleagues with impunity for decades was in part a consequence of the nearly incomprehensible significance of the discoveries that astrobiology promises.

We shouldn't stop at the implosion of one horrible man's career, however. The interconnections between researchers, scientific knowledge, and the structures of power that shape our world are deep, but they, like Marcy's cameo in _First Contac_ t, leave little traces for us to follow. In an essay for _The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism_ , Stacy Alaimo, a literature scholar and eco-cultural theorist, lays out one of the central tenets of feminist science studies: "... to search for the prior or primary field of science studies as that which transcends gender is to reestablish the very hierarchies that feminist theory and cultural studies critique." (3) If we think of feminist science studies not as an extra disciplinary framework that we graft onto our investigation of astrobiology rather as a key to deciphering the patterns of power that already exist, we begin to see them everywhere.

Astrobiologists, having yet to find any extraterrestrial life to study, focus a great deal of effort on understanding "extremophile" species that live in harsh environments on earth. In some of Kaufman's more lurid passages, he follows a team of extremophile researchers who are looking for microbes in the deepest parts of mine shafts, a place where life was always assumed to be impossible. Researchers utilized these modern mine shafts, which were conveniently pre-dug by the capitalist engines of resource extraction, to collect microbes to study. Kaufman writes, "maybe it was to redeem the dark history of those mines—flashpoints during the apartheid era and still controversial because of the pay and inevitably harsh conditions—that operators took a chance and allowed the scientists in." (4) The focus of the extremophile narrative is on the scientists and their observations and the labor and exploitative process that makes them possible are simply rendered as the setting for discovery. Any complicity the sciences might have in the dark history that Kaufman alludes to is quickly scattered again by the blinding significance of its potential findings.

When astrobiologists do achieve their goal and begin to describe the other forms of life in the universe to us, we can expect to hear the echoes of those very social constructions that the critics of science studies insist are too small and petty to apply to such cosmic questions. We can see right now the way that they affix themselves to the practices of astrobiology, almost without notice. Marcy and his ilk, those scientists who are at the top of highly influential fields, and whose misogyny and sexism are on full display, are only the most visible parts of the systems of gender and power on which all sciences are built. The sexual harassment scandals that have come to light in the past several years are symptoms, not the root cause, of the systems of power and domination that are baked into the practice of science.

### Notes

1 Marc Kaufman, _First Contact: Scientific Breakthroughs in the Hunt for Life Beyond Earth_ (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2012).

2 Azeen Ghorayshi, "Here's How Geoff Marcy's Sexual Harassment Went on for Decades," _Buzzfeed.com_ , November 11, 2015. https://www.buzzfeed.com/azeenghorayshi/how-harassment-stays-secret?utm_term=.uyk3RKM7L#.erRg3B5DK

3 Stacy Alaimo, "Feminist Science Studies and Ecocriticism: Aesthetics and Entanglement in the Deep Sea," in Greg Garrard, ed., _The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism_ (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).

4 Kaufman 17.
Bibliography

Abt, Jeffrey. _American Egyptology: The Life of Henry James Breasted and the Creation of His Oriental Institute_. University of Chicago Press, 2011.

Abu-Lughod, Lila. V _eiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in a Bedouin Society_. 2nd ed. University of California Press, 2000.

Adelman, Madeline. "The Battering State: Towards a Political Economy of Domestic Violence." _Journal of Poverty_ , no. 8 (2004): 45–64.

Adler, Margot. _Drawing Down the Moon: Witches, Druids, Goddess-Worshippers, and Other Pagans in America_. Boston: Beacon Press, 1986.

Alaimo, Stacy. "Feminist Science Studies and Ecocriticism: Aesthetics and Entanglement in the Deep Sea." in _The Oxford Handbook of Ecocriticism_ , edited by Greg Garrard. Oxford University Press, 2014.

Alcott, L.M. _Hospital Sketches_. Boston: James Redpath, 1863.

Alper, Meryl. _Giving Voice: Mobile Communication, Disability, and Inequality_. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2017.

Bazin, H. _Vaccination: A History from Lady Montagu to Genetic Engineering_. John Libbey Eurotext, 2011.

Behar, Ruth, and Deborah A. Gordon, eds. _Women Writing Culture_. University of California Press, 1995.

Benedict, Ruth. _Patterns of Culture_. Mariner Books, 2006.

Besse, Susan K. Restructuring Patriarchy: _The Modernization of Gender Inequality in Brazil, 1914-1940_. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1996.

Bittle, Carla. _Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Politics of Medicine in Nineteenth-Century America_. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009.

Boisseau, T.J., and Markwyn, Abigail M. _Gendering the Fair: Histories of Women and Gender at World's Fairs_. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2010.

Bottome, Phyllis. _"The Liqueur Glass." In Homefront Horrors: Frights Away From the Front Lines_ , 1914-1918, edited by Jess Nevins. Courier Dover Publications, 2016.

Breasted, J.H. _The Edwin Smith Surgical Papyrus, Volume 1: Hieroglyphic Transliteration, Translation, and Commentary_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1930.

Brown, Lydia X. Z. Primer. Autistic Hoya, 2016. http://www.autistichoya.com/p/resources.html.

Brownlee, John. "Google's Latest Accessibility Feature Is So Good, Everyone Will Use It." _Fast Co Design_ , May 20, 2016.

Bruton, Sam. "Meet Diane Snow, New Dean of the John V. Roach Honors College." _TCU360_ , November 15, 2016.

Carley, James P. _Glatsonbury Abbey: The Holy House at the Head of the Moors Adventurous. St. Martin's Pres_ s, 1988.

Cho, Nadia. "Being Queer Means..." _HuffPost_ , February 2, 2016.

Choy, Catherine Ceniza. _Empire of Care: Nursing and Migration in Filipino American History_. Duke University Press, 2003.

Clarke, Edward H. _Sex in Education; or, A Fair Chance for Girls_. Houghton Mifflin, 1873.

Cook, James Wyatt, and Barbara Collier Cook. _Man-Midwife, Male Feminist: The Life and Times of George Macaulay, M.D., Ph.D. (1716-1766)_. Ann Arbor: University Library Scholarly Publishing Office, 2004.

Cordato, Mary Francis. "Towards a New Century of Women and the Philadelphia Centennial Exhibition, 1876." _Pennsylvania Magazine and Biography_ 107, no. 1 (1983): 113–36.

Crosby, Sarah L. _The Female Poisoner and the Framing of Popular Authorship in Jacksonian America._ University of Iowa Press, 2016.

Curtis, George D. Souvenir of the Centennial Exhibition. Hartford, CN.: Geo D. Curtis, 1877.

D'Antonio, Patricia. _American Nursing: A History of Knowledge, Authority, and the Meaning of Work_. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010.

Das, Veena. L _ife and Words: Violence and Descent into the Ordinary_. University of California Press, 2006.

DeLancey, Apryl. "Girls Aren't Good at Math." _HuffPost_ , August 18, 2016.

Leonardo, Micaela di. _Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era._ Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991.

Drife, J. "The Start of Life: A History of Obstetrics." P _ostgraduate Medical Journal_ 78 (2002): 211–315.

Dvorak, Petula. "Women Make History but Their Husbands Get the Credit. How Infuriating Is That?" _The Washington Post_ , August 8, 2016.

Elliot, Clark A., and Margaret Rossiter. _Science at Harvard University: Historical Perspectives_. Associated University Press, 1992.

Engelhaupt, Erika. "Peek Into Tiny Crime Scenes Built by an Obsessed Millionaire." _National Geographic_ , August 6, 2016.

F.C.W. "Moral Poisons: The Antidote." _Mother's Magazine_ , May 1845.

Feay, Suzy. "Florence Nightingale: A New Biography Sheds Light on the Lady with the Lamp." _Independent_ , September 27, 2008.

Fett, Sharla M. _Working Cures: Health, Healing, and Power on Southern Slave Plantation_. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002.

Frazer, James G. _The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion_. New York: Macmillan, 1922.

Gabriela, Torres M. "The Prominence of Consent." _Anthropology News_ , 2016.

Gardner, Gerald. _Witchcraft Today_. Rider & Co., 1954.

Ghorayshi, Azeen. "Here's How Geoff Marcy's Sexual Harassment Went on for Decades." _Buzzfeed.Com_ , November 11, 2015.

Gianquitto, Tina. _Good Observers of Nature: American Women and the Scientific Study of the Natural World, 1820-1885_. University of Georgia Press, 2007.

Giberti, Bruno. _Designing the Centennial: A History of the 1876 International Exhibition in Philadelphia_. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 2002.

Gibson, Susannah. _Animal, Vegetable, Mineral?: How Eighteenth-Century Science Disrupted the Natural Order_. Oxford University Press, 2015.

Ginsburg, Faye D. _Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community._ University of California Press, 1998.

Gitelman, Lisa. _"Raw Data" Is an Oxymoron_. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013.

Glessner Lee, Frances. "Legal Medicine at Harvard University." _The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_ 42, no. 5 (1952): 674–78.

Greville, Charles. _The Greville Memoirs: A Journal of the Reigns of King George IV, King William IV, and Queen Victoria_. Longmans, Green, & Co., 1899.

Grover, Atul. "The Good and Bad Statistics on Women in Medicine." _The Wall Street Journal_ , October 29, 2015.

Gruenbaum, Ellen. _The Female Circumcision Controversy: An Anthropological Perspective_. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001.

Gunther, Daniel F., and Douglas S. Diekema. "Attenuating Growth in Children With Profound Developmental Disability: A New Approach to an Old Dilemma." _Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine_ 160, no. 10 (2006): 1013–17.

Haldane, Hillary J., and Jenifer R. Wiles, eds. _Anthropology at the Front Lines of Gender-Based Violence_. Vanderbilt University Press, 2011.

Hamblin, James. "Evidence of the Superiority of Female Doctors." _The Atlantic_ , December 19, 2016.

Haraway, Donna. "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century." in _Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature_ , 149–81. New York: Routledge, 1991.

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. "Rappaccini's Daughter." in _Mosses from an Old Muse_. G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1846.

Hawthorne, Nathaniel. "The Birth Mark," 1943.

Hine, Darlene Clark. _Black Women in White: Racial Conflict and Cooperation in the Nursing Profession, 1890-1950_. Indiana University Press, 1989.

Holmes, Justice Oliver Wendell. Buck v. Bell, No. 247 (1927).

Huang, Mingwei. "Vulnerable Observers: Notes on Fieldwork and Rape." _Chronicle for Higher Education_ , October 12, 2016.

Hunt, Harriot. _Glances and Glimpses, or, Fifty Years Social, Including Twnety Years Professional Life_. John P. Jewett and Company, 1856.

Hurston, Zora Neale. _Mules and Men_. Research & Education Association, 1999.

Hurston, Zora Neale. _Tell My Horse: Voodoo and Life in Haiti and Jamaica_. Harper Collins, 2009.

Johnson, Alix. "The Self at Stake: Thinking Fieldwork and Sexual Violence." _Savage Minds: Notes and Queries in Anthropology_ (blog), March 16, 2016.

Jones, Claire G. _Femininity, Mathematics and Science, 1880-1914_. Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

Kaufman, Marc. _First Contact: Scientific Breakthroughs in the Hunt for Life Beyond Earth_. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2012.

Kevles, Daniel J. _In the Name of Eugenics_. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

Klatt, Dennis H. "Analysis, Synthesis, and Perception of Voice Quality Variations Among Female and Male Talkers." _The Journal of Acoustical Society of America_ 87, no. 820 (1990).

Kline, Wendy. _Building a Better Race: Gender, Sexuality, and Eugenics from the Turn of the Century to the Baby Boom_. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005.

Krasniewicz, Louise. "The Life and Adventures of Emma Allison," n.d. https://emmaallison.me/.

Lanigan, Roison. "Congrats Girl! Fiancé of Former Miss California Scoops His 25th Medal." Babe, August 10, 2016.

Lapidos, Juliet. "When Did Halloween Get So Tawdry." _Slate_ , October 28, 2010.

Lewin, Ellen, ed. _Feminist Anthropology: A Reader._ 2006, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Linker, Beth. _War's Waste: Rehabilitation in World War I America_. University of Chicago Press, 2011.

Loeb, E. M. "Review: The Witch-Cult in Western Europe: A Study in Anthropology by Margaret Alice Murray." _American Anthropologist_ 24, no 4 (1922): 476-8.

Lyell, _Charles. Life, Letters, and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell_. John Murray, 1881.

Magnello, Eileen. "Florence Nightingale: The Compassionate Statistician." _Plus Magazine_ , December 8, 2018.

Mahmood, Saba. _Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject_. Princeton University Press, 2011.

Marino, Katherine M. "Transnational Pan-American Feminism: The Friendship of Bertha Lutz and Mary Wilhelmine Williams, 1926-1944." _Journal of Women's History_ 26, no. 2 (2014): 63–87.

Mariono, Katherine. "The Heritage of Latin American Women's Political Empowerment." _Gender News_ , August 2, 2012.

Martin, Emily. _The Woman in the Body: A Cultural Analysis of Reproduction_. Beacon Press, 2001.

Martin, Pete. "How Murderers Beat the Law." _The Saturday Evening Post_ , December 10, 1949.

McCabe, James D. _The Illustrated History of the Centennial Exhibition_. Philadelphia: National Publishing Company, 1876.

McNeill, Leila A. "One Last Bone to Pick." _Lady Science_ , 2014.

McNeill, Leila A., and Anna Reser. "Delivery Room Drama." _Lady Science_ , 2014.

Mead, Margaret. _Coming of Age in Samoa: A Psychological Study of Primitive Youth for Western Civilisation_. Perennial Classics, 2001.

Mead, Margaret. _Growing up in New Guinea: A Comparative Study of Primitive Education_. Perennial Classics, 2001.

Melosh, Barbara. _"The Physician's Hand": Work Culture and Conflict in American Nursing_. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1982.

Merry, Sally Engle. _Gender Violence: A Cultural Perspective_. 1st ed. WIley Blackwell, 2008.

Miller, Laura J. "Dentured Domesticity: An Account of Femininity and Physiognomy in the Interiors of Frances Glessner Lee." in _Negotiating Domesticity: Spatial Productions of Gender in Modern Architecture_ , 196–213. Routledge, 2005.

Miller, Laura J. "Frances Glessner Lee: Brief Life of a Forensic Miniaturist: 1878-1962." _Harvard Magazine_ , October 2005.

Mills, Mara. "Media and Prosthesis: The Vocoder, the Artificial Larynx, and the History of Signal Processing." _Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences_ 21, no. 1 (2012): 107–49.

Moraes de Oliveira Sombrio, Mariana, Mary Margaret Lopez, and Lea Maria Leme Strini Velho. "Práticas e Disputas Em Torno Do Patrimônio Científico-Cultural: Bertha Lutz No Conselho de Fiscalização Das Expedições Artísticas e Científicas Do Brasil." _Varia Hist_ 24, no. 39 (2008): 311–27.

Moreno, Eva. "Rape in the Field: Reflections of a Survivor." in _Taboo: Sex, Identity and Erotic Subjectivity in Anthropological Fieldwork_ , 219–50. Routledge, 2003.

Mower, Christine Leiren, and Susanne Weil, eds _. Women and Work: The Labors of Self-Fashioning_. Cambridge Scholars Pub, 2011.

Mulla, Sameena. _The Violence of Care: Rape Victims, Forensic Nurses, and Sexual Assault Intervention_. NYU Press, 2014.

Murray, Margaret. "The Egyptian Elements in the Grail Romance" 3, no. 1 (1916): 1–14.

Murray, Margaret. "Organisations of Witches in Great Britain." _Folklore_ 28, no. 3 (1917): 228–58.

Murray, Margaret. _The Witch-Cult in Western Europe: A Study in Anthropology_. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1921.

Murray, Margaret. "Witchcraft." _The Encyclopedia Britannica_. Vase to Zygote, 1929.

Nagy, Victoria. "Narratives in the Courtroom: Female Poisoners in Mid-Nineteenth Century England." _European Journal of Criminology_ 11, no. 2 (2014): 213–27.

Neeley, Kathryn. _Mary Somerville: Science, Illumination, and the Female Mind_. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

Oates, Caroline, and Juliette Wood. _A Coven of Scholars: Margaret Murray and Her Working Methods_. London: Folklore Society, 1998.

Opitz, Donald L., Staffan Bergwik, and Brigitte Van Tiggelen. "Introduction." in _Domesticity in the Making of Modern Science_ , 1–19. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.

Ott, Katherine. "The Sum of Its Parts: An Introduction to Modern Histories of Prosthetics." in A _rtificial Parts, Practical Lives: Modern Histories of Prosthetics_. New York: NYU Press, 2002.

Patterson, Elizabeth Chambers. _Mary Somerville and the Cultivation of Science, 1815-1840_. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1983.

Petch, Alison. "Margaret Murray." England: _The Other Within, Analysing the English Collections at the Pitt Rivers Museum_ , n.d.

Phelps, Elizabeth. _Familiar Letters on Botany, Practical, Elementary, and Physiological_. FJ Huntington, 1836.

Pietilä, Hilkka. _The Unfinished Story of Women and the United Nations_. United Nations, 2007.

Pollard, Amy. "Field of Screams: Difficulty and Ethnographic Fieldwork." _Anthropology Matters_ 11, no. 2 (2009).

Putnam Jacobi, Mary. _The Question of Rest during Menstruation_. G. P. Putnam and Sons, 1877.

Quinn, Naomi. "What to Do About Sexual Harassment: A Short Course for Chairs." _American Anthropological Association: Advancing Knowledge; Solving Human Problems_ (blog), n.d.

Ransom, Caroline L. _Studies in Ancient Furniture; Couches and Beds of the Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans_. University of Chicago Press, 1905.

Ransom Williams, Caroline. _The Tomb of Per-Neb, with Illustrations_. New York: The Gillis Press, 1915.

Rapp, Rayna. _Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America_ (The Anthropology of Everyday Life). 1st ed. Routledge, 2001.

Reverby, Susan M. _Ordered to Care: The Dilemma of American Nursing, 1850-1945_. Cambridge University Press, 1987.

Riddle, John M. _Goddesses, Elixirs, and Witches: Plants and Sexuality Throughout Human History_. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2010.

Roberts, Meghan K. _Sentimental Savants: Philosophical Families in Enlightenment France_. University of Chicago Press, 2016.

Rosenbloom, Stephanie. "Good Girls Go Bad, for a Day." _The New York Times_ , October 19, 2006.

Rossiter, Margaret. _Women Scientists in America: Struggles and Strategies to 1940_. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984.

Sambuco, Dana, and Reshma Jagsi. "Women's Participation in the Medical Profession: Insights from Experiences in Japan, Scandinavia, Russia, and Eastern Europe." Journal of Women's Health 23, no. 11 (2014): 975–934.

Savulescu, Julian, and Mark Sheehan. "The Ashley Treatment: Best Interests, Convenience, and Parental Decision-Making." _Hastings Center Report_ 37, no. 2 (2007): 16–20.

Schoen, Johanna. _Choice and Coercion: Birth Control, Sterilization, and Abortion in Public Health and Welfare_. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005.

Scott, Joan W. "Gender: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis." _The American Historical Review_ 91, no. 5 (1986): 1053–75.

Shanahan, Jesse. "Disability in Not a Disqualification." _Science_ , January 22, 2016.

Sheppard, Kathleen. _The Life of Margaret Alice Murray: A Woman's Work in Archaeology_. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2013.

Sheppard, Kathleen, ed. _My Dear Miss Ranson: Letters Between Caroline Ransom Williams and James Henry Breasted, 1898-1934_. Archaeopress, 2018.

Schiebinger, Londa. _Nature's Body: Gender in the Making of Science_. Rutgers University Press, 2004.

Schiebinger, Londa, Ineke Klinge, Hee Young Paik, Inés Sánchez de Madariaga, Martina Schraudner, and Marcia Stefanick, eds. "Making Machines Talk: Formulating Research Questions." in _Gendered Innovations in Science, Health & Medicine, Engineering, and Environment_, 2011. https://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/case-studies/machines.html.

Shostak, Marjorie. _Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman_. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.

Shteir, Ann B. _Cultivating Women, Cultivating Science: Flora's Daughters and Botany in England, 1760 to 1860._ Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.

Skinner, Carolyn. _Women Physicians and Professional Ethos in Nineteenth-Century America_. Carbondale, Illinois: Southern Illinois University Press, 2014.

Smalley, Eugene V. "In and Out of the New Orleans Exposition, Second Paper." _Century Illustrated Magazine_ , June 1885.

Smith, A. _Twilight Sleep in America: The Truth About Painless Childbirth_. Victoria Pub Co., 1915.

Smith, J.L. International Exhibition, Fairmount Park, Philadelphia, 1876: Acts of Congress, Rules and Regulations, Description of the Buildings. Philadelphia: United States Centennial Commission, 1875.

Stanton, Elizabeth Cady. _Eighty Years and More (1815-1897): Reminiscences of Elizabeth Cady Stanton_. European Publishing Company, 1897.

Stern, Alexandra Minna. _Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America_. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2015.

Strathern, Marilyn. "An Awkward Relationship: The Case of Feminism and Anthropology." _Signs_ 12, no. 2 (1987).

Swaby, Rachel. _Headstrong: 52 Women Who Changed Science- and the World_. Broadway Books, 2015.

Tomes, Nancy. _The Gospel of Germs: Men, Women, and the Microbe in American Life_. Harvard University Press, 1998.

Townley Crane, Jonathan. _Popular Amusements_. Cincinnati: Hitchcock and Walden, 1869.

Tsugawa, Yusuke, Anupam B. Jena, Jose F. Figueroa, E. John Orav, Daniel M. Blumenthal, and Ashish K. Jha. "Comparison of Hospital Mortality and Readmission Rates for Medicare Patients Treated by Male vs Female Physicians." _JAMA Intern Med_ 177, no. 2 (2017): 206–13.

Vassar, Lyndra. "How Medical Specialities Vary by Gender." _AMA Wire_ , February 18, 2015.

Warren, Tom. "The Story of Cortana, Microsoft's Siri Killer." _The Verge_ , April 2, 2014.

Warwick, Andrew. _Masters of Theory: Cambridge and the Rise of Mathematical Physics_. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

Watson, B.P. "The Development of Obstetrics." _Canadian Medical Association Journal_ 4, no. 6 (1914): 469–80.

Wells, Kellie. _Fat Girl, Terrestrial: A Novel_. 1st ed. Fictive Collective 2, 2012.

Whaley, Leigh. _Women and the Practice of Medical Care in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800_. Palgrave MacMillan, 2011.

White, Ethan Doyle. _Wicca: History, Belief and Community in Modern Pagan Witchcraft_. Sussex Academic Press, 2016.

Wiles, Jenifer R. "Title IX and the State of Campus Sexual Violence in the United States: Power, Policy, and Local Bodies." _Human Organization_ 74, no. 4 (2015).

Young, Alexander. _A Discourse on the Life and Character of the Hon. Nathanial Bowditch_. Charlges C. Little and James Brown, 1838.

"A Woman in an Engineer's Role." _Philadelphia Times_ , June 2, 1876.

"What One Woman Is Doing." _The New Century for Woman_ , June 3, 1876.

"The Great Exhibition: What Women Have Done For It." _The New York Times_ , June 4, 1876.

"The Centennial Exhibition." _Scientific American_ , June 24, 1876.

"At the Centennial Exhibition." _The Saturday Evening Post_ , July 8, 1876.

"Obituary of Frances Lee." _The New York Times_ , January 28, 1962.

"Reproductive Rights and Women with Disabilities: A Human Rights Framework." Center For Reproductive Rights, 2002.

"New from the Center for Nursing Advocacy." _The American Journal of Nursing_ 105, no. 6 (June 2005): 19–22.

"Statistics and Facts about Students with Disabilities Pursuit of Degrees in STEM Fields." University of Delaware, n.d. http://sites.udel.edu/seli-ud/facts/.

### Images

The Truth About Nursing, "Inject me: Sketchers tries on the stereotypes with Christina Aguilera as 'naught and nice' 'nurse'" (http://www.truthaboutnursing.org/news/2004/aug/skechers.html)

The Truth About Nursing, "Q. What's the big deal about 'naughty nurse images' in the media? I mean, no one believes nurses really dress like that!" (http://www.truthaboutnursing.org/faq/naughty_nurse.html)

U. S. National Library of Medicine, The Zwerdling Postcard Collection: Pictures of Nursing, Exhibition: "The Art of Nursing: Romance, Comedy, and Titilation" (https://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/picturesofnursing/exhibition5s0.html). [Hereafter: NLM-ZPC]

Hal Hurst, "An Angel of Mercy," (N.Y. : Reinthal & Newman, 1915)

(http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101611729) (NLM-ZPC)

"Not in the prescription," ([England]: Raphael Tuck & Sons, [between 1914 and 1918?])

(http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101612295) (NLM-ZPC)

"Read the top line - then skip to the bottom!" ([United States]: [Publisher not identified,] [between 1919 and 1952]) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101458809) (NLM-ZPC)

"Add a black eye to whatever he's already got!" ([England]: [publisher not identified], [1950?]) (http://resource.nlm.nih.gov/101611532) (NLM-ZPC)

### Archival Sources

Museu Nacional, coleção Bertha Lutz, correspondência, document 115/9
