Presentation

Homage to Fanny Tabak, Eulalia Pérez Sedeño, Mariza Corrêa

This dossier, Gender in the Sciences: Histories and policies in the Ibero-American context, appears ten years after the publication of the last dossier about the theme of gender studies in the sciences and technologies in cadernos pagu , entitled “ciência, substantivo feminino plural” [science, female noun, plural]. Since then, new research paths have been taken and the objects and foci of study have diversified. These paths have led us to emphasize in debates, texts and presentations something that the theoretical references in the fields of gender studies in the sciences and social studies of sciences and technologies have warned us since the 1970s: there are no sciences that are not human sciences. Scientific cultures, which are socially constructed, engendered, locally situated and contingent, and have specific historicities, were and continue to be broadly debated since the founding texts of the 1970s, 80s and 90s of both disciplinary fields.¹

Post-colonial theories in the realm of studies of gender and intersectionalities have increasingly emphasized the role that the research perspectives of the so-called “countries of the South” can offer, by addressing problematics of gender based on other points of view and cultural and economic contexts that are quite different from those found especially in production in the United States. These new theories arise as a counterpoint to a construction that is excessively based on perspectives marked by colonialism; by different types of hegemonic proposals that present themselves as universalizing and homogenizing; and by essentialisms and conservativisms that do not allow paying attention to various perspectives of racial, ethnic, sexual, cultural, age, political and economic diversities.

Theoretical tools of the human and social sciences, based on feminist theories have contributed to our rethinking of gender relations and meanings and the inequalities produced by these divisions. For Fraser (2006), there are two forms of understanding injustice; the social-economic and that based on social and cultural standards of representation, recognition, interpretation and communication. Representativeness is the defining issue of politics and in this sense women of different races and ethnicities and other groups with limited representation in arenas of political debate still face countless challenges. In terms of the history and politics of the sciences, there is still a pressing need to recognize and value the participation and production of women and the way that unequal relations, symbologies and stereotypes of gender have been incorporated and reproduced in scientific practices and institutions, while ignoring racial and ethnic dimensions. This continues to influence the careers of women and men, and the values and forms of organization of scientific and technological institutions.

Various articles in this dossier contribute to this urgent need to recognize and value the participation of women and their production, and their role in the construction of disciplinary fields. The articles are guided by various analytical perspectives. They range from the opening article of the dossier by Rebeca Ibáñez Martín, Esther Ortega Arjonilla and Eulalia Pérez Sedeño, about the ten years of production of “Cuerpos y práticas” [Bodies and Practices] in Madrid, to the article about the scientific production of Marta Vannucci about plankton at the Instituto Oceanográfico de São Paulo. There is an article about the linguistic production of Graciete Batalha, in Malacca, in the context of Portuguese colonialism in Asia, and an article about the status achieved by the hormone oxytocin as a new technological artifact. One of our objectives was to make visible the so-called “Mulheres sem Fronteiras” [Women without Borders] who occupy new places and are included in proposals in which we were not contemplated, as suggested by Léa Velho, Rebeca Feltrin and Janaína Pamplona da Costa. The dossier is an effort to reveal advances of studies in gender in the sciences in recent decades, regardless of their theoretical and methodological approaches to the themes.

We have advanced considerably, but we are still an emerging field of studies in Brazil, which is constructing its histories. For this reason, in this presentation, we want to remember that well before the last dossier of 2006, Pagu was already the gender studies center that was a pioneer in raising the intersectionality of the themes of gender relations in the sciences and technologies to Brazilian academic debate, including in its scope the Latin American countries. In 1998, Elisabeth Bortolaia Silva, the editor invited to organize issue number 10 of the journal – cadernos pagu: gênero, tecnologia e ciência – affirmed in her presentation that the issue was “the first publication in the Portuguese language to contemplate the connection between these themes” (Silva, 1998:5). This in no way was to ignore earlier articles published in various journals and books in various regions of Brazil² over the years, which reveal the growing interest in the theme.

In our histories in Brazil, some of which have been systematized (Cabral, 2008; Stancki, 2009; Minella, 2013), it is important to remember that a number of authors consider articles by Carmen Barroso such as “A participação da mulher no desenvolvimento científico brasileiro” [The participation of women in Brazilian scientific development] (1975a), and “Porque tão poucas mulheres exercem atividades científicas” [Why so few women exercise scientific activities] (1975b), to be among the first texts that address the theme, which continues to be completely current, of the sub-representation of and discrimination against women in predominantly masculine scientific careers. These articles by Barroso – the well-known specialist in population studies, who was recently awarded the United Nations Population Award for 2016 (Pioneira..., 2016) – follow the global trend inaugurated by studies that until today are references, such as that by Alice Rossi, “Women in Science: Why so few?”, published in Science in 1965.

In this trajectory of the disciplinary field in Brazil, in the late 1980s Fanny Tabak, organizer of the first Academic Nucleus for Women Studies (NEM) at the Pontifical Catholic University (PUC) of Rio de Janeiro also focused her work on a discussion of the insertion of women in scientific careers, a theme that is present in this dossier in articles that discusses scientific policies in Brazil, Costa Rica and Mexico. Since 1988, Fanny Tabak was convinced of the importance of encouraging girls and young women to enter scientific careers considered to be masculine. Even because - as she emphasized in an interview in 2003 – despite the scope of conquests by feminist movements, the sciences and technologies have still not awakened all the interest that they deserve, among men and women researchers in the field (Tabak, 2003). Her Laboratório de Pandora (2002) became a required reference for gender studies in the sciences.

In 1996 Fanny Tabak was one of the first Brazilian researchers to participate in a very successful initiative³ that led to the Ibero-American Congress on Science, Technology and Gender, which is now in its tenth edition.⁴ Many of the authors from Brazil and other Ibero-American countries such as Spain, Argentina, Mexico, and Costa Rica who have articles in this dossier, contributed decisively to the consolidation of this institutional space.

Eulalia Pérez Sedeño – a Spanish philosopher with a long career in studies of gender, sciences and technologies, was and continues to be a catalyst and articulator and has had an important role at the Ibero-American Congresses. She was in Brazil, participating at the meeting of the Brazilian Society of History of Science and published the article “La enseñanza de la historia de las ciencias y los estudios sobre la mujer” (Perez Sedeño, 1992), in volume 7 of the Revista da Sociedade, in 1992.⁵ Since then she has had close contact with researchers from the field in various Latin American countries and the Caribbean.⁶

This field of studies has gained greater visibility since its beginnings in Brazil, through the initiatives of the Brazilian Society for the History of Science and of the Latin American Society for the History of Science and Technology. We follow in the path taken by the field of studies of gender and sciences in the United States, which was strongly articulated by the contribution of scientists and science historians such as Evelyn Fox Keller, Donna Haraway, Londa Schiebinger, Margaret Rossiter and many others, in the realm of congresses and publications of the History of Science Society.

In 1998, the 5^th Latin American Congress of the History of Science and Technology was held in Rio de Janeiro with the central theme: “Gender, Science and Technology in the History of Latin America”. A photo of Bertha Lutz (1894-1976) – the recognized Brazilian feminist and biologist⁷ – opened the book of abstracts from the congress.⁸ The congress sought precisely to disseminate studies of gender in science and technology among us. Londa Schiebinger was one of the invited speakers and had one of her articles (2001) and a book translated into Portuguese, and in 2008 she authorized the translation of her article: “Mais mulheres na ciência: questões de conhecimento”,⁹ for the special volume (supplement) Gênero e Ciências, organized by Nara Azevedo and collaborators of the journal História, Ciências, Saúde - Manguinhos, one of the vehicles for promotion of the disciplinary field, marking 30 years since the rise of the articulated terms of gender and science in the work of Evelyn Fox Keller (1978; 1995).

Our decision to present contributions from some Ibero-American authors is based on historic, political, theoretical and methodological issues. We sought to pay homage to pioneers in this field, which in some way includes many of us present in this dossier. We are certain that we all feel very well represented by the mention of the names of Fanny Tabak, in the Brazilian case, and Eulalia Pérez Sedeño for all of us who are Ibero-Americans. Since this dossier was first proposed, we had the explicit intention to involve young researchers who are increasingly facing many of the challenges discussed here, in constructing their careers, and particularly when inserted in new perspectives in the field of gender studies in the sciences and technologies.

This presentation also seeks to review some aspects of the trajectory of this disciplinary field, especially in Brazil, to help trace some of its memories and histories and stimulate others. We are inspired by publications in the social studies of science (Jasanoff, 2016) that emphasize the importance of individual statements and perspectives that help to consolidate fields of study and investigation, which even if they already have many contributions, are still emergent as academic disciplines (Hilgartner, 2003).

In terms of the academic consolidation of gender studies as a disciplinary field, the production of gender, science and technology follows the trend of gender studies in general to give priority to the broad and diversified field of biomedical sciences, health, corporalities and sexualities like those presented in this publication by Rebeca Ibáñez Martín, Esther Ortega Arjonilla and Eulalia Pérez Sedeño; Fabíola Rohden; and Luciana Palharini.

In the article that opens this dossier, Martín, Arjonilla and Sedeño present a synthesis of the work of their research group in Spain, emphasizing investigations about particular ways our bodies have been modified and influenced by technologies, especially the bodies of women, but not only of women. They base their analyses on the ways that each body is specifically linked to a set of practices, technologies and discourses, focusing on gender dimensions. The studies mentioned by the authors include analyses about techniques of human reproduction, relations between aesthetic surgeries and feminism, the definition and treatment of sexual dysfunctions, eating disorders and other approaches that are fundamental to the current debate about gender.

In the same direction, Fabíola Rohden and Fernanda Vecchi discuss the status achieved by the hormone oxytocin as a new technological artifact and how it has been presented by different media in Brazil in the past three decades. They identify this characterization of oxytocin as part of a broader process of the fabrication of distinct hormonal bodies and the service of reproduction, revealing how studies of gender and technology have shown that technologies exercise an essential role by helping to stabilize or destabilize gender conventions. The article by Luciana Palharini analyzes aspects of the history of the attention to labor and childbirth and their biopolitical relations, proposing an analysis of the hegemonic medical discourse based on technology and the notion of risk, in relation to current questioning of this model, especially concerning the protagonism of women in pregnancy and childbirth.

In terms of the disciplinary fields, a series of initiatives have been developed in the field of physics and others that articulate the hard sciences and the life sciences since the decade of 2000, under the leadership of Elisa Maria Baggio Saitovitch and Marcia Cristina Bernardes Barbosa, who brought the international experience of Women in Physics to Brazil, to discuss and analyze scientific careers in the field (Lima, 2008; Barbosa; Lima, 2013; Saitovitch, Lima, Barbosa, 2015). In the case of historic and political studies in fields such as biology, the studies and initiatives of Ângela Maria Freire de Lima e Souza, of NEIM and the graduate program in interdisciplinary studies about women, gender and feminism of the Federal University at Bahia, have contributed to consolidate the field, which is one of the most expressive in the international realm (Sousa, 2014).

But among the disciplines, perhaps it is in the realm of the history of the sciences and science policy that the most significant production has accumulated in Brazil in the analyses of the relations of gender and the sciences, as articles in this dossier reveal. Studies of the trajectories and biographies of women scientists have increasingly expanded our knowledge about these experiences, illuminating practices, fields of studies and the women actors involved and have revealed that the production of scientific knowledge is a much more collective and diverse undertaking than the traditional image constructed by the historiography of the sciences allows us to know.

Following this line of research that reveals the trajectories of women scientists, considering the profound invisibility of female participation in the history of the sciences, the article by Alex Varella analyzes the work of the first Brazilian oceanographer, Marta Vannucci, at the Instituto Oceanográfico of the University of São Paulo (IO-USP), between 1946 and 1969. This opens the field of studies in the history of Brazilian oceanography to the perspective of the history and trajectory of women. The article about Portuguese linguist Graciete Batalha, in Malacca, by the Portuguese co-authors Ema Pires and Maria de Fátima Nunes, presents the trajectory of the linguist, inserting her experience in a broader debate about the decolonization of scientific productions over Asian territories that were under colonial control. The study identifies that Batalha’s work was tied to a late colonialist subjectivity, given that she lived at a transitional moment in the production of these scientific discourses: in a shift between the romantic influence of the 19^th century and a line of thinking with post-colonial characteristics, which has been especially stimulated since the 1970s in Portugal and its former colonies.

The study by Mariana Sombrio addresses experiences of women on scientific excursions in Brazil in the first half of the twentieth century. The association between field research and masculine heroism, particularly conventional in the 19^th century, made it difficult for women to participate on these excursions and be accepted in these roles. The adverse conditions of these field trips did not easily complement the image of women, who were socially associated to domestic activities, or to the accepted attributes of the female body. To reconsider these relationships, the author reviewed historic documents, and presents experiences of women scientists that have received little attention until now.

These articles offer unprecedented contributions, broadening the geographic scope and the fields in which they are inserted such as the history of the sciences, museology and anthropology. The latter, one of the most traditional disciplinary areas in gender studies in Brazil, has in the researchers gathered in the Revista de Estudos Feministas, another group of required references for studies of gender, sciences and technologies (Grossi, 2004). The article by Mariana Sombrio presents innovative articulations, such as the analyses of gender in museums (Levin, 2010; Lopes, 2016; Sombrio, 2016).

Returning to Fraser’s perspectives on justice, she argues that equity requires both recognition and redistribution. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the means by which economic privation and cultural disrespect are interlinked and sustain inequalities (Fraser, 2006). In this sense, the articles in this dossier that discuss the systems of science and technology in Costa Rica, Mexico and Brazil try to understand the question of recognition and redistribution from a gender perspective and also considering the representativeness of studies that problematize or reveal data about scientific production in “peripheral” countries. This denomination is often used for Ibero-American countries and in particular those in Latin American. Although it is quite problematic and highly questioned, it continues to be used in the context of global scientific production. Many questions raised by the article of Teresita Cordero about actions for gender equity at the University of Costa Rica, and about science and technology policies with a gender perspective in Mexico, in the text by Norma Blazquez and Lourdes Fernández, remain central and common in Brazil, even if each country has particular realities.

Examining the political-academic trajectory of the field in Mexico, the authors establish parallels with the politics of gender and sciences in Brazil analyzed by the article “Gênero, ciências e tecnologias: caminhos percorridos e novos desafios”. In this text, Betina Stefanello Lima and Maria Conceição da Costa discuss advances and limits of scientific policies for gender equity, considering the actions of the sole program about the issue implanted in Brazil at the federal level since 2005, the Women and Science Program, of the Special Secretariat for Women’s Policies in partnership with CNPq and other institutions. These advances and limitations indicate how women from various scientific fields have been inserted in professions in public space, how these disciplines incorporate (or not) a female presence, how scientific policies aimed at women have functioned and how themes related to gender stereotypes, “feminine aspects”, or those seen as such are treated within the sciences, by university institutions and the systems of science and technology. Many of the studies in this line are contributions that are essential to the construction of a historic series that allow comparative analyses of Brazil with Latin American and other countries internationally, without losing sight of the local character of the experiences of these women in the specific locations where they constructed their careers.

In this same line of analysis of public policy, the article “Mulheres sem Fronteiras?’ [Women without Borders] by Rebeca Feltrin, Léa Velho and Janaína Pamplona da Costa discusses the recent science policy program implemented in Brazil known as “Science Without Borders”. The authors identify “women without borders” as those who are able to go beyond two “borders”: “that of access to the most “valued” fields of science and that are recognized for having a high concentration of male scientists (the exact sciences and earth science, biotechnology, and the oceanographic sciences) and that of “access to grants from the programs for mobility aimed at a group that is mostly male in terms of the number of students per course”. The article shows that the women breaking stereotypes are breaking barriers through their expressive participation – which was not planned by the program – in various priority areas of the Science without Borders program.

Revealing the strengthening of publication in the field of studies of gender and sciences, the article by Nanci Stancki da Luz and Lucas Bueno de Freitas conducts an overview of the field of gender, sciences and technologies in Brazil, by surveying articles published in four periodicals of gender studies in the past 15 years – cadernos pagu, Revista de Estudos Feministas, Revista Feminismos and Cadernos de Gênero e Tecnologia da UTFPR. Based on this study, they present arguments and hypotheses that have been used by authors in this field to justify and exemplify the need for gender analyses in the sciences and technologies, highlighting Brazilian and Latin American work. Considering that the references highlighted are often from countries of the North, the considerations raised by the authors elucidate our own context, demonstrating the diversity of studies produced. It should be remembered that the Group of Studies and Research about Gender Relations and Technology (GeTec), of the Federal Technological University of Paraná (UTFPR), in which the authors participate, was the first nucleus for gender studies to specify the study of sciences and technologies in its name. The academic vitality and productivity of the group, in both the graduate program in technology, in its journal Cadernos de Gênero e Tecnologia, and in the journal Revista Tecnologia e Sociedade were responsible for bringing to Curitiba, for the only time until now in Brazil, the Ibero-American Congress of Science, Technology and Gender, under the coordination of Marília Gomes de Carvalho and her team (2011).

All of the questionings raised in this dossier consider the fact that the construction of what is called “modern science” has been deeply marked by divisions and stereotypes of gender, race and ethnicity, emphasizing locations considered universal, as well as views and characteristics associated to the masculine in the methods of production of knowledge. A characteristic that is still very strong in our field of studies in Brazil is the absence of analyses of broader scope about the inter-relations of gender, science and technology and reflections about ethnic and racial issues in this scientific universe, as was identified by Luzinete Minella (2013), and which is also revealed in the article by Betina Stefanello Lima and Maria Conceição da Costa. The possibility for racial self-identification in the Currículos Lattes [an official database of academic resumes in Brazil] can be a first step in this direction. Although understood as a conquest, this practice still meets resistance in various sectors of the academic community.

This entire dossier, beginning with this introduction, also has the methodological objective to present what has become an extensive bibliography in the studies of gender in the sciences and technology. All the articles offer very rich and diversified bibliographies, with little overlapping and few crossed references among the men and women authors published. To make these publications visible is perhaps a contribution to the consolidation of the field.

We cannot conclude this presentation without mentioning that we hope that this dossier encourages new reflections and actions, especially at this moment of setbacks in racial, gender and diversity policies in Brazil. We can also not conclude without expressing our appreciation to Mariza Corrêa, as a representative of all the researchers of Pagu. In 1992, Mariza Corrêa, with her expertise in studies of race, genders and diversities, and her intellectual openness and academic generosity, received with open arms the introduction of gender studies in sciences and technologies in the conceptual framework of gender studies at Pagu.

Maria Margaret LopesMariana Moraes de Oliveira Sombrio

Referências bibliográficas

• Azevedo, Eliane et al. A mulher cientista no Brasil. Dados atuais sobre sua presença e contribuição. Ciência e Cultura, 41(3), março, 1989, pp.275-283.
• Barroso, Carmen. A participação da mulher no desenvolvimento científico brasileiro. Ciência e Cultura, 27, 1975a, pp. 613-620.
• Barroso, Carmen. Porque tão poucas mulheres exercem atividades científicas. Ciência e Cultura, 27, 1975b, pp.703-711.
• Cabral, Carla Giovana. Mapeando e refletindo a construção do campo disciplinar “Estudos feministas da ciência e da tecnologia” no Brasil nos percursos do “Fazendo Gênero”. In: Seminário Internacional Fazendo Gênero 8, Florianópolis, 2008. Anais eletrônicos... [http://www.fazendogenero.ufsc.br/8/sts/ST38/Carla_Giovana_Cabral_38.pdf acesso em: 21 jul. 2016].
  » http://www.fazendogenero.ufsc.br/8/sts/ST38/Carla_Giovana_Cabral_38.pdf
• Cabral, Carla Giovana. Os estudos feministas da ciência e da tecnologia no brasil: reflexões sobre estilos e coletivos de pensamento. Revista Ártemis, vol. XX, ago-dez 2015, pp.76-91 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15668/1807-8214/artemis.v20n2p76-91
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.15668/1807-8214/artemis.v20n2p76-91
• Citeli, Maria Teresa Mulheres nas ciências: mapeando campos de estudo. cadernos pagu (15), Campinas, SP, Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero – Pagu/Unicamp, 2000, pp.39-75.
• Creager, A; Lunbeck, E.; Schiebinger, L. (eds.) Feminism in twentieth-century science, technology, and medicine. Chicago/London, The University of Chicago Press, 2001, pp.1-19.
• Fox-Keller, Evelyn. Gender and Science. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Tought 1, 1978, pp.409-33.
• Fox-Keller, Evelyn. The Origin, History, and Politics of the Subject Called “Gender and Science”. In: Jasanoff, Sheila et alii (eds.). Handbook of Science and Technology Studies Thousand Oaks, Sage Publishing, 1995, pp.80-94.
• Fraser, Nancy. Da redistribuição ao reconhecimento? Dilemas da justiça numa era pós-socialista. Cadernos de campo, n. 14/15, São Paulo, 2006, pp.1-382.[Tradução: Julio Assis Simões]
• Grossi, M. P. A Revista Estudos Feministas faz 10 anos - Uma breve história do feminismo no Brasil. Revista Estudos Feministas, vol. 12, Florianópolis, 2004, pp.211-222.
• Hilgartner, S. Institutionalizing Science & Technology Studies in the Academy. In: Joerges, B.; Nowotny, H. (ed.) Social Studies of Science and Technology: Looking Back, Ahead. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2003, pp.201-210.
• Jasanoff, Sheila. The Floating Ampersand: STS Past And STS To Come. Engaging Science, Technology, And Society (2), 2016, pp.227-237.
• Joerges, B., Nowotny, H. (eds.) Social Studies of Science and Technology: Looking Back, Ahead Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher, 2003.
• Levin, Amy K. (ed.). Gender, Sexuality and Museums New York, Routledge, 2010.
• Kreimer, Pablo et alii. (Org.). Perspectivas latinoamericanas en el estudio social de la ciencia, la tecnología y el conocimiento. Ciudad de Mexico, Siglo XXI, 2014.
• Lima e Souza, Ângela Maria Freire de; Aras, Lina Brandão de (org.). Mulheres e movimentos: estudos interdisciplinares de gênero Salvador, EDUFBA/NEIM, 2014. (Coleção Bahianas, 16)
• Lopes, Maria Margaret. A ciência não é uma jovem de costumes fáceis: aspectos das relações de gênero na História da Ciência no Brasil. Cadernos IG-UNICAMP, vol.2, n.1, Campinas, SP, 1992, pp.90-107.
• Lopes, Maria Margaret. Sobre convenções em torno de argumentos de autoridade cadernos pagu (27), Campinas, SP, Núcleo de Estudos de Gênero – Pagu/Unicamp, 2006, pp.35-61.
• Lopes, Maria Margaret. Mulheres e Ciências no Brasil: uma história a ser escrita. In: Costa, Ana Alice Alcântara; Sardenberg, Cecilia Maria Bacellar (org.) Feminismo Ciência e Tecnologia Salvador, REDOR/NEIM-FFCH/UFBA, 2002. (Coleção Bahianas 8)
• Lopes, Maria Margaret. Proeminência na mídia, reputação em ciências: a construção de uma feminista paradigmática e cientista normal no Museu Nacional do Rio de Janeiro. História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos, vol.15, suppl.0, Rio de Janeiro, 2008.
• Lopes, Maria Margaret; Souza; Sombrio. A construção da invisibilidade das mulheres nas ciências: a exemplaridade de Bertha Maria Júlia Lutz (1894-1976). Revista Gênero, vol. 5, n. 1, Niterói, 2 semestre 2004, pp.97-109.
• Luz, Nanci Stancki da; Carvalho, Marília Gomes de; Casagrande, Lindamir Salete. Grupo de Estudos sobre relações de gênero e tecnologia: dez anos de produção científica. Tecnologia & Humanismo, vol. 1, 2009, pp.68-94.
• Matos, Marlise. Movimentos e Teoria Feminista: É possível reconstruir a teoria feminista a partir do Sul Global? Revista Sociologia Política, vol. 18, n. 36, Curitiba, jun. 2010, pp.67-92.
• Pérez Sedeño, Eulália. La enseñanza de la historia de las ciencias y los estudios sobre la mujer. Revista Brasileira de História da Ciência, vol.7, 1992, pp.25-30 [http://www.sbhc.org.br/revistahistoria/view?ID_REVISTA_HISTORIA=35].
  » http://www.sbhc.org.br/revistahistoria/view?ID_REVISTA_HISTORIA=35
• Pérez Sedeño, Eulália. Entrevista a Cristina Tavares da Costa e Miriam Pillar Grossi. Revista Estudos Feministas, Florianópolis, vol. 17, n. 1, 2009, pp.191-205.
• Pérez Sedeño, Eulalia; Alcalá, Paloma. Ciencia y género Madrid, Editorial Complutense, 2001.
• Pioneira em estudos de gênero, cientista social brasileira Carmen Barroso vence prêmio da ONU. Publicado em 28/4/2016 [https://nacoesunidas.org/cientista-social-brasileira-carmen-barroso-vence-premio-de-populacao-onu/ – acesso em: 20 jul. 16].
  » https://nacoesunidas.org/cientista-social-brasileira-carmen-barroso-vence-premio-de-populacao-onu/
• Rossi, Alice. Women in Science: Why so few? Science, vol. 148, n.3674, 1965, pp.1196-1202. DOI: 10.1126/science.148.3674.1196
  » https://doi.org/10.1126/science.148.3674.1196
• Schiebinger, Londa. Mamíferos, primatologia e sexologia. In: Porter, Roy; Teich, M. (orgs.). Conhecimento sexual, ciência sexual: a história das atitudes em relação à sexualidade São Paulo, Unesp, 1998, pp.219-246.
• Schienbinger, Londa. O feminismo mudou a ciência? São Paulo, EDUSC, 2001 [Trad. Raul Fiker].
• Schienbinger, Londa. Mais mulheres na ciência: questões de conhecimento. História, ciências, saúde – Manguinhos, v. 15, supl., Rio de Janeiro, 2008 [http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-59702008000500015].
  » http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-59702008000500015
• Tabak, Fanny. O laboratório de Pandora. Estudos sobre a ciência no feminino. Rio de Janeiro, Garamond, 2002.
• Tabak Fanny. Entrevista. É tempo de incentivar a presença das mulheres na ciência. SBPC/Labjor, 2003 [http://www.comciencia.br/entrevistas/mulheres/tabak.htm – acesso em: 21 jul. 2016].
  » http://www.comciencia.br/entrevistas/mulheres/tabak.htm
• Tosi, Lucía. A mulher brasileira, a universidade e a pesquisa científica. Ciência e Cultura, 33(2), fevereiro, 1981, pp.167-177.
• Wolellner, Lucy. Ciência, Tecnologia e Gênero: desvelando o feminino na construção do conhecimento. IAPAR – Instituto Agronômico do Paraná, Paraná, 2006.

• 1
  There are countless revisions of the disciplinary fields, such as the works joined in Creager, Lunbeck and Schiebinger (2001), and Joerges & Nowotny (2003). We would like to thank professor Maria Conceição da Costa for the reference to this book. Among the publications in Brazil see, Citeli (2000) and number 15, 2006, of cadernos pagu – gênero, ciências, história – which includes articles by Evelyn Fox Keller, Maria Margaret Lopes, Carla Giovana Cabra and other authors. For the more recent Latin American case see Kreimer, Vessuri Velho and Arrellano (2014).
• 2
  It is not possible to list all the contributions to the field, many of them mentioned in the publications that follow, or are referenced here. We only mention a few of the broader and foundational works, including those from 1980 to 2000, such as those by Lucia Tosi (1981), Lopes (1992), Citeli (2000), Lopes (2006), Costa e Sardenberg (2002). The later includes authors such as Diana Maffia, Fanny Tabak, Ângela Maria Freire de Lima e Souza, and other researchers who participated in the X Encontro da REDOR, held in Salvador, Bahia, in November 2001, http://www.neim.ufba.br/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/feminismocienciencia.pdf. There is also the compendium by Wolellner et al. (2006) produced by the nucleus of the Instituto Agronômico do Paraná (IAPAR).
• 3
  The volume prepared from this meeting has a single work by a Brazilian researcher, Maria Margaret Lopes (2001).
• 4
  The first encounter was held in 1996, in Madrid, led by researchers recognized in the field: Eulália Perez Sedeño, Silvia Kochen, Diana Mafia and the 44 women authors who contributed their articles (Alcalá & Perez Sedeño, 2001). The following encounters were held in Buenos Aires (1998), Panamá (2000), Madrid (2002), Mexico (2004), Zaragoza (2006), Havana (2008), Curitiba (2010), Seville (2012), Asuncion (2014), São José da Costa Rica (2016) and the next one is planned for Bilbao, in 2018. Publications resulting from these events are available on the web at: Madri, 2002 http://www.campus-oei.org/ctsi/congmadrid.htm; México 2004, http://www.convencion.org.uy/lang/es/v-congreso-iberoamericano-de-ciencia-tecnologia-y-genero; Zaragoza 2006 http://wzar.unizar.es/siem/Formativas/congreso%20genciber/Congreso.html; Havana, 2008 http://www.clam.org.br/publique/cgi/cgilua.exe/sys/start.htm?infoid=2806&sid=3; Curitiba 2010 http://files.dirppg.ct.utfpr.edu.br/ppgte/eventos/cictg/conteudo_cd/art_eixo.html; Seville 2012 http://www.oei.es/congresoctg/. For considerations and a bibliography about these events (most are available on line) see among other articles Lopes et al (2014).
• 5
  In 2009, her interview with Cristina Tavares da Costa and Miriam Pillar Grossi in Madrid was published in vol. 17, n. 1 of the Revista Estudos Feministas.
• 6
  Eulalia Pérez Sedeño is senior professor in philosophy, and a researcher of CSIC http://cchs.csic.es/es/personal/eulalia.psedeno She is now coordinator of the Red Iberoamericana de Ciencia, Tecnología y Género, financed by CYTED, formed by more than 80 researchers from 10 countries: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Spain, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela, whose coordinator in Brazil is Carla Giovana Cabral, of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. http://www.cyted.org/?q=es/detalle_proyecto&un=868
• 7
  Lopes; Souza; Sombrio (2004); Lopes (2008).
• 8
  The congress was held under the direction of Silvia Fernanda de Mendonça Figueirôa, at the Sociedade Latino-Americana. After this larger event, there were various other symposiums, congresses and round tables at the Academia Brasileira de Ciências, ANPUH, the Sociedade Brasileira de História da Ciência, the Seminário Internacional Fazendo Gênero, the congresses of REDOR, SBPC, Esocite, and at the Conferencias Latinoamericanas de Mujeres en las Ciencias Exactas y de la Vida, which to a greater or lesser degree, and from different perspectives and academic disciplines opened space for discussions about gender in the sciences.
• 9
  Another essential article by Londa Schiebinger translated to Portuguese is “Mamíferos, primatologia e sexologia” (1998).

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  2017