This article argues that Shields’ work demonstrated that it is impossible to practice value-free science. And, despite the efforts of many feminist psychologists who have argued that the question of sex differences is someone else’s question, biological theories about the differences between women and men are still popular and influential today. This paper will call attention to four areas of scholarship produced by second-wave feminist psychologists who were inspired by Shields’ work: (1) rediscovery of the work of first-wave feminist psychologists, (2) discussion of the impossibility of value-free research on sex differences, (3) introduction of new categories of analysis such as “gender” and reframing research based on these new categories, and (4) addition of more value-laden categories to sex such as race, social class, and sexuality and using intersectionality theory to design new avenues of research.
Baird, V. (2007). The no-nonsense guide to sexual diversity. Oxford, England: New Internationalist Publications.
2.
BarkerM.LangdridgeD. (2008) II. Bisexuality: Working with a silenced sexuality. Feminism and Psychology18(3): 389–394.
3.
BernsteinM. D.RussoN. F. (1974) The history of psychology revisited: Or, up with our foremothers. American Psychologist29(2): 130–134.
4.
BrescollV.LaFranceM. (2004) The correlates and consequences of newspaper reports of research on sex differences. Psychological Science15: 315–320.
5.
BrownR. P.JosephsR. A. (1999) A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology76: 246–247.
6.
CapdevilaR.LazardL. (2015) Psychology of women: Questions of politics and practice. In: ParkerI. (eds) Handbook of critical psychology. Routledge international handbook, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 191–199.
7.
ChrislerJ. C. (2007) The subtleties of meaning: Still arguing after all these years. Feminism and Psychology17(4): 442–446.
8.
DavisG. (2014) “Bringing intersexy back”? Intersexuals and sexual satisfaction. In: StomblerM.BaundachD. M.SimondsW.WindsorE. J.BurgessE. O. (eds) Sex matters: The sexuality & society reader, New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, pp. 11–21.
9.
DeauxK. (1985) Sex and gender. Annual Review of Psychology36(1): 49–81.
10.
DottoloA. L.StewartA. J. (2013) “I never think about my race”: Psychological features of white racial identities. Qualitative Research in Psychology10: 102–117. doi: 10.1080/14780887.2011.586449.
11.
FineM. (2012) Troubling calls for evidence: A critical race, class and gender analysis of whose evidence counts. Feminism and Psychology22(1): 3–19.
12.
Fine, M., Weis, L., Pruitt, L. P., & Burns, A. (Eds.) (2004). Off white: Readings on power, privilege, and resistance. New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
FurumotoL. (1979) Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930) fourteenth president of the American Psychological Association. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences15: 346–356.
14.
FurumotoL. (1992) Joining separate spheres – Christine Ladd-Franklin, woman-scientist (1847–1930). American Psychologist47: 175–182.
15.
GrayJ. (1992) Men are from Mars, women are from Venus: A practical guide for improving communication and getting what you want in your relationships, New York, NY: HarperCollins.
16.
HaigD. (2004) The inexorable rise of gender and the decline of sex: Social change in academic titles: 1945–2001. Archives of Sexual Behavior33: 87–96.
17.
HainesB. A.AjayiA. A.BoydH. (2014) Making trans parents visible: Intersectionality of trans and parenting identities. Feminism and Psychology24(2): 238–247.
18.
HydeJ. S. (2005) The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist60(6): 581–592.
19.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2005) Antecedents and consequences of system justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science14: 260–265.
20.
MaccobyE. E.JacklinC. N. (1974) The psychology of sex differences, London, England: Stanford University Press/Oxford University Press.
21.
MertonR. K. (1968) The Mathew effect in science. Science159: 56–63.
22.
MorawskiJ. G.AgronickG. (1991) A restive legacy: The history of feminist work in experimental and cognitive psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly15: 567–579.
23.
O’ConnellA. N.RussoN. F. (1991) Women’s heritage in psychology: Past and present. Psychology of Women Quarterly15: 495–504.
24.
RussoN. F.O’ConnellA. N. (1980) Models from our past: Psychology’s foremothers. Psychology of Women Quarterly5: 11–53.
ScarboroughE.FurumotoL. (1987) Untold lives: The first generation of American women psychologists, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
27.
SershenH.HashimA.LajhtaA. (1998) Gender differences in Kappa-opiod modulation of cocaine-induced behavior and NMDA-evoked dopamine release. Brain Research801: 67–71.
28.
ShieldsS. A. (1975a) Functionalism, Darwinism, and the psychology of women: A study in social myth. American Psychologist30: 739–754.
29.
ShieldsS. A. (1975b) Ms. Pilgrim's progress: The contributions of Leta Stetter Hollingworth to the psychology of women. American Psychologist30: 852–857.
30.
Shields, S. A. (Ed.). (2008). Special issue on intersectionality. Sex Roles, 59, 350–364.
31.
SøndergaardD. M. (2005) Making sense of gender, age, power and disciplinary position: Intersecting discourses in the academy. Feminism and Psychology15(2): 189–208.
32.
StaunæsD. (2005) From culturally avant-garde to sexually promiscuous: Troubling subjectivities and intersections in the social transition from childhood into youth. Feminism and Psychology15(2): 149–167.
33.
SteeleC. M.AronsonJ. (1995) Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African-Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology69: 797–811.
34.
TauchesK. (2006) Transgendering: Challenging the “normal.”. In: SeidmanS.FischerN.MeeksC. (eds) Handbook of the new sexuality studies, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 186–192.
35.
TavrisC. (1992) The mismeasure of woman, New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
36.
TaylorY. (2011) Intersectional dialogues—A politics of possibility?. Feminism and Psychology21(2): 211–217.
37.
UngerR. K. (1979) Toward a redefinition of sex and gender. American Psychologist34(11): 1085–1094.
38.
UngerR. K. (2001) Women as subjects, actors, and agents in the history of psychology. In: UngerR. K. (eds) Handbook of the psychology of women and gender, New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 3–16.
39.
UngerR. K. (2007) Afterword: From inside and out: Reflecting on a feminist politics of gender in psychology. Feminism and Psychology17: 487–494.
40.
WalshR. J. (2015) XI ‘Objectivity’ and intersectionality: How intersectional feminism could utilise identity and experience as a dialectical weapon of liberation within academia. Feminism and Psychology25(1): 61–66.
41.
WeissteinN. (1968) Kinder, kuche, kirche as scientific law: Psychology constructs the female (revised and expanded version), Boston, MA: New England Free Press.
42.
Wilkinson, S. (1997). Still seeking transformations: Feminist challenges to psychology. In L. Stanley, (Ed.) Knowing feminisms: On academic borders, territories and tribes (pp. 97–107). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
43.
ZuckerA. N. (2004) Disavowing social identities: What it means when women say, ‘I’m not a feminist, but…’. Psychology of Women Quarterly28(4): 423–435. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00159.x.
