Chalmers, Alan
(1982) What is this Thing Called Science?2nd edn.Milton Keynes: Open University Press
.
7.
Ermarth, Elizabeth
(2000)
‘What Counts as Feminist Theory?’
, Feminist Theory1(1):
113-118
.
8.
Feminist Studies (1998)
Special Issue on ‘Disciplining Feminism? The Future of
Women’s Studies’
, 24(2):
235-482
.
9.
Harding, Sandra
(1991) Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking From
Women’s Lives.
Milton Keynes: Open University Press
.
10.
Harding, Sandra
(1993) ‘Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology:
“What Is Strong Objectivity?”’, pp.
49-82 in
L. Alcoff
and
E. Potter
(eds) Feminist Epistemologies.
London: Routledge
.
Irigaray, Luce
(1985) ‘This Sex Which is Not
One’, pp. 23-33 in This Sex Which is
Not One, trans. Catherine Porter with Carolyn Burke.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press
.
14.
Jackson, Stevi
(1995) ‘Gender and Heterosexuality: A
Materialist Feminist Analysis’, pp.
11-26 in
M. Maynard
and
J. Purvis
(eds) (Hetero)Sexual Politics.
London: Taylor & Francis
.
15.
King, Katie
(2001)
‘Productive Agencies of Feminist Theory: The Work it Does’
, Feminist Theory2(1):
94-98
.
16.
Longino, Helen
(1990) Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in
Scientific Inquiry.
Princeton: Princeton University Press
.
17.
Longino, Helen
(1993) ‘Subjects, Power and Knowledge:
Description and Prescription in Feminist Philosophies of
Science’, pp. 101-120 in
L. Alcoff
and
E. Potter
(eds) Feminist Epistemologies.
London: Routledge
.
18.
Mannheim, Karl
(1952) Essays on The Sociology of Knowledge, ed. and
trans.
Paul Kecskemeti.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
.
19.
Mannheim, Karl
(1956) ‘The Problem of the Intelligentsia: An
Inquiry into its Past and Present Role’, pp.
91-170 in Essays on the Sociology of Culture, ed.
Ernest Mannheim in co-operation with
Paul Kecskemeti.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
.
20.
Mannheim, Karl
(1968 [1936]) Ideology and Utopia: An Introduction to the
Sociology of Knowledge (with a Preface by Louis Wirth).
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
.
21.
Marchbank, Jen
and
Gayle Letherby
(2001)
‘Not “Missing” but Marginalized? Alternative
Voices in Feminist Theory’
, Feminist Theory2(1):
104-107
.
22.
Maynard, Mary
(1995)
‘Beyond the “Big Three”: The Development of
Feminist Theory into the 1990s’
, Women’s History Review4(3):
259-281
.
23.
Peto, Andrea
(2001)
‘An Empress in a New-Old Dress’
, Feminist Theory2(1):
89-93
.
24.
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty
(1987) ‘French Feminism in an International
Frame’, pp. 134-153 in In Other
Worlds: Essays in Cultural Politics.
London: Methuen
.
25.
Stacey, Jackie
(1997) ‘Feminist Theory: Capital F, Capital
T’, pp. 54-76 in
D. Richardson
and
V. Robinson
(eds) Introducing Women’s Studies, 2nd edn.London: Macmillan
.
26.
Stacey, Judith
(2001)
‘The Empress of Feminist Theory is Overdressed’
, Feminist Theory2(1):
99-103
.
27.
Stanley, Liz
and
Sue Wise
(2000)
‘But the Empress has no Clothes! Some Awkward Questions about the
“Missing Revolution” in Feminist Theory’
, Feminist Theory1(3):
261-288
.