关键词：
NONFICTION
摘要：
The three books under review focus on the development of expertise in the United States and the role of perceptions about human difference and fitness for citizenship in public policy debates. In the nineteenth century, physicians and scientists increasingly claimed specialized knowledge and assumed positions of cultural authority in public discourse, as well as social authority in institutions. In Measuring Manhood: Race and the Science of Masculinity, 1830-1934, Melissa Stein invokes Stephen J. Gould’s book about nineteenth-century scientific racism and biological determinism, The Mismeasure of Man (1981). Laura Briggs has observed that work like Gould’s and William Stanton’s The Leopard’s Spots (1972) "understood the production of racial difference to be something that science did primarily to male bodies."1 A similar observation animates Measuring Manhood. Citing initial work by Gould, Stanton, and George Frederickson, among others, as the standard historiography, Stein frames her project as part of an "emerging scholarship that examines the intersection of race, gender, and sexuality," scholarship intended as a corrective to histories that in her assessment have inadequately examined the meanings of anatomy and "paid little attention to gender" (pp. 18, 20). Stein overstates the gap in the literature, but this project does contribute an analysis of how inextricably intertwined racial science and public discourse about citizenship [End Page 470] were; likewise the substantial, constitutive overlap between racial science and sexology prior to World War I.2 Measuring Manhood’s primary contributions lie in its first three chapters: on the antebellum development of biological paradigms of racial difference as knowledge produced by, for, and about men (chapter one); post-bellum deliberation about gender and citizenship vis-à-vis race (chapter two); and the co-evolution of late nineteenth-century racial science and sexology (chapter three). Stein
欢迎来到三峡大学图书馆！
详细信息
中文科技期刊
