Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Feminist Theory
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The ghost of anatomies past

Simulating the one-sex body in modern medical training

Ericka Johnson

University of Linköping, erijo{at}tema.liu.se

An examination of the use of medical simulators shows that they contain traces of the one-sex body model found in pre-Enlightenment anatomies. The simulators present the male body as ‘male including female’ rather than ‘male, not female’. Only when female sex organs are relevant to a practice, as in gynaecology, does a simulator need to become ‘female, not male’. The widely held modernist understanding of sex and gender as binary categories is actually masking local practices which allow varied sex and gender paradigms to coexist in simulator use. This analysis applies the discussions of Laqueur, Schiebinger and Faulkner to simulator practice. The consequences of recognizing the presence of the one-sex body are two-fold. Firstly, seeing that the reification of medical knowledge can still be haunted by conceptual paradigms of the past forces a more nuanced understanding of the variety that localized medical practices contain. Secondly, observing the ease with which the reified knowledge of a one-sex body is embraced by subjects who also exist in a world of binary gender points to the complexity our subjectivities can embrace and forces the researcher to acknowledge the implications of the simulations’ context.

Key Words: anaesthesiology • anatomies • binary sex • gynaecology • medical practice • MIS • one-sex body • simulators

Feminist Theory, Vol. 6, No. 2, 141-159 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1464700105053691


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Body SocietyHome page
E. Johnson
Simulating Medical Patients and Practices: Bodies and the Construction of Valid Medical Simulators
Body Society, September 1, 2008; 14(3): 105 - 128.
[PDF]


Home page
Science Technology Human ValuesHome page
E. S. Johnson
Out of My Viewfinder, Yet in the Picture: Seeing the Hospital in Medical Simulations
Science Technology Human Values, January 1, 2008; 33(1): 53 - 76.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Social Studies of ScienceHome page
E. Johnson
Surgical simulators and simulated surgeons: reconstituting medical practice and practitioners in simulations.
Social Studies of Science, August 1, 2007; 37(4): 585 - 608.
[Abstract] [PDF]