Balsamo, A.
(1996) Technologies of the Gendered Body: Reading Cyborg
Women.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press
.
2.
Barad, K.
(1998)
‘Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization
of Reality’
, Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies10(2):
87-128
.
3.
Bayer, B.M.
and
Malone, K.R.
(1996)
‘Feminism, Psychology and Matters of the Body’
, Theory & Psychology6:
667-692
.
4.
Bem, S.
(1974)
‘The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny’
, Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology42:
155-162
.
5.
Boston Women’s Health Book Collective
(1973) Our Bodies, Ourselves: A Book By and For Women.
New York: Touchstone/Simon & Schuster
.
6.
Carlson, R.
(1972)
‘Understanding Women: Implications for Personality Research’
, Journal of Social Issues28(2):
17-32
.
7.
Chesler, P.
(1972) Women and Madness.
Garden City, NY: Doubleday
.
8.
Constantinople, A.
(1973)
‘Masculinity-Femininity: An Exception to a Famous Dictum?’
, Psychological Bulletin80:
389-407
.
9.
Haraway, D.
(1986) ‘Primatology is Politics by Other
Means’, in
R. Bleier
(ed.) Feminist Approaches to Science, pp.
77-118.
New York: Pergamon
.
10.
Haraway, D.
(1996) ‘Modest Witness: Feminist Diffractions in
Science Studies’, in
P. Gallison
and
D.J. Stump
(eds) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power,
pp. 428-441.
Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press
.
11.
Horner, M.S.
(1972)
‘Toward an Understanding of Achievement-Related Conflicts in Women’
, Journal of Social Issues28:
157-175
.
12.
Keller, E.F.
(1996) ‘The Dilemma of Scientific Subjectivity
in Postvital Culture’, in
P. Gallison
and
D.J. Stump
(eds) The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power,
pp. 417-427.
Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press
.
13.
Maccoby, E.E.
and
Jacklin, J.W.
(1974) The Psychology of Sex Differences.
Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press
.
14.
Metzl, J.M.
(2002)
‘Prozac and the Pharmacokinetics of Narrative Form’
, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society27:
347-380
.
15.
Meyerowitz, J.
(2002) How Sex Changed: A History of Transsexuality in the
United States.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
.
Scott, J.W.
(2001) ‘Millennial Fantasies: The Future of
“Gender” in the 21st Century’, in
C. Honegger
and
C. Arni
(eds) Gender - die Tücken einer Kategorie, pp.
19-37.
Zurich: Chronos
.
20.
Shields, S.A.
(1975)
‘Functionalism, Darwinism and the Psychology of Women: A Study in
Social Myth’
, American Psychologist30:
739-754
.
21.
Smith, B.H.
(2000) ‘Sewing Up the Mind: The Claims of
Evolutionary Psychology’, in
H. Rose
and
S. Rose
(eds) Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary
Psychology, pp. 155-172.
New York: Harmony Books
.
22.
Spence, J.T.
and
Helmreich, R.
(1972)
‘Who Likes Competent Women? Competence, Sex Role Congruence of
Interests, and Subjects’ Attitudes Toward Women as Determinants of
Interpersonal Attraction’
, Journal of Applied Social Psychology2:
197-213
.
23.
Taynor, J.
and
Deaux, K.
(1973)
‘When Women are More Deserving than Men: Equity, Attribution, and
Perceived Sex Differences’
, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology28:
360-367
.
24.
Terry, J.
(1997) ‘The Seductive Power of Science in the
Making of Deviant Subjectivity’, in
V.A. Rosario
(ed.) Science and Homosexualities, pp.
271-295.
New York: Routledge
.
25.
Terry, J.
(1999) An American Obsession: Science, Medicine, and
Homosexuality in Modern Society.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press
.
26.
Unger, R.K.
(1983)
‘Through the Looking Glass: No Wonderland Yet! (The Reciprocal
Relationship between Methodology and Models of Reality)’
, Psychology of Women Quarterly8(1):
9-32
.
27.
Unger, R.K.
and
Denmark, F.L.
(1975) Woman: Dependent or Independent Variable?New York: Psychological Dimensions
.
28.
Weisstein, N.
(1971) ‘Psychology Constructs the
Female’, in
V. Gornick
and
B.K. Moran
(eds) Women in Sexist Society, pp. 207-224.
New York: American Library
.
29.
Wilson, E.A.
(1998) Neural Geographies: Feminism and the Microstructure of
Cognition.
New York: Routledge
.
