Material Feminism and Epigenetics: A ‘Critical Window’ for Engagement?

Warin, Megan; Hammarström, Anne

doi:10.1080/08164649.2018.1538695

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Akin to our interlocutors from feminist neuroscience (Roy, 2016;Fine et al, 2017), critical neuroscience (Choudhury and Slaby, 2011) and feminist STS (Haraway, 1988;Wilson, 2004), we believe that an analysis of difference (and sameness) on the scales of neurophysiology and sociality to be a vital progressive step, and one to be made with caution, care and a willingness to experiment with novel methodologies. What remains concerning, however, are the common-sense assumptions in regard sex and gender a number of epigenetic researchers expressed during interviews, which has also been illustrated in feminist STS scholarship (Kenney and Müller, 2017;Richardson, 2017;Saldaña-Tejeda, 2018;Warin and Hammarström, 2018). Importantly, we argue that whilst neuroepigenetic ideations may shed light on the ways in which trauma moves in, through and even out of the brain, we believe that epigenetics as a scientific culture needs to be held accountable for its own conceptual decisions, especially with regard to assertions about gender, race and class.…”

Section: Trauma's Neuroepigenetic Agency/legacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the gendered dimension of epigenetic studies has been robustly considered ( Kenney and Müller, 2017 ; Richardson, 2017 ; Saldaña-Tejeda, 2018 ; Warin and Hammarström, 2018 ), and notions of trauma have been analyzed in the context of the epigenetics of suicide risk ( Lloyd and Raikhel, 2018a , b ), the ways in which gender and sex epistemologically underpin neuroepigenetic studies of trauma is yet to be investigated. To our knowledge, there have not yet been any feminist STS engagements at the intersection of sex, gender, epigenetic imprint and the nervous system; although we do not explore this in great depth here, it is important to highlight that this area requires further attention.…”

Section: Stereotypes and The “Sound Of Biology”mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gender Beneath the Skull: Agency, Trauma and Persisting Stereotypes in Neuroepigenetics

Lawson-Boyd

Meloni

2021

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epigenetics stands in a complex relationship to issues of sex and gender. As a scientific field, it has been heavily criticized for disproportionately targeting the maternal body and reproducing deterministic views of biological sex (Kenney and Müller, 2017; Lappé, 2018; Richardson et al., 2014). And yet, it also represents the culmination of a long tradition of engaging with developmental biology as a feminist cause, because of the dispersal of the supposed ‘master code’ of DNA among wider cellular, organismic and ecological contexts (Keller, 1988). In this paper, we explore a number of tensions at the intersection of sex, gender and trauma that are playing out in the emerging area of neuroepigenetics - a relatively new subfield of epigenetics specifically interested in environment-brain relations through epigenetic modifications in neurons. Using qualitative interviews with leading scientists, we explore how trauma is conceptualized in neuroepigenetics, paying attention to its gendered dimensions. We address a number of concerns raised by feminist STS researchers in regard to epigenetics, and illustrate why we believe close engagement with neuroepigenetic claims, and neuroepigenetic researchers themselves, is a crucial step for social scientists interested in questions of embodiment and trauma. We argue this for three reasons: (1) Neuroepigenetic studies are recognizing the agential capacities of biological materials such as genes, neurotransmitters and methyl groups, and how they influence memory formation; (2) Neuroepigenetic conceptions of trauma are yet to be robustly coupled with social and anthropological theories of violence (Eliot, 2021; Nelson, 2021; Walby, 2013); (3) In spite of the gendered assumptions we find in neuroepigenetics, there are fruitful spaces – through collaboration – to be conceptualizing gender beyond culture-biology and nature-nurture binaries (Lock and Nguyen, 2010). To borrow Gravlee’s (2009: 51) phrase, we find reason for social scientists to consider how gender is not only constructed, but how it may “become biology” via epigenetic and other biological pathways. Ultimately, we argue that a robust epigenetic methodology is one which values the integrity of expertise outside its own field, and can have an open, not empty mind to cross-disciplinary dialogue.

show abstract

Section: Trauma's Neuroepigenetic Agency/legacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stereotypes and The “Sound Of Biology”mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Beneath the Skull: Agency, Trauma and Persisting Stereotypes in Neuroepigenetics

Lawson-Boyd

Meloni

2021

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Normative implications of postgenomic deterministic narratives: the case study of epigenetic harm

Moormann

2024

HPLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

‘Nonetheless biosocial’: experiences and embodied knowledge of birth cohort participants in the UK and Brazil

Mathers,

Gibbon,

Riley

et al. 2024

BioSocieties

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relative expansion of biosocial research within the life sciences has generated substantial interest from social sciences, with epigenetic science and scientists the primary target of critical commentary. This has led to a narrow perspective on what the biosocial is and how it is being (re)constituted within scientific research, highlighting a need to engage diverse publics in this unfolding terrain of knowledge making. Whilst birth cohorts are often a central resource and primary context for emerging fields of biosocial and epigenetic research, how cohort participants perceive and understand ‘biosocial’ interactions in the context of their lifelong and intergenerational participation is less well known. Drawing on pilot study research with birth cohort participants in the UK and Brazil, we comparatively examine how, in the absence of explicit references to a biosocial exemplar of epigenetics, biosocial dynamics are nonetheless understood by participants in relation to (i) embodied experiences, (ii) intergenerational participation, and (iii) understandings of the knowledge the studies aim to produce. Attending to different understandings of biological and social dynamics in diverse publics helps diversify and broaden the conceptual and methodological tools used to engage in and understand what the biosocial is and how it is coming into being.

show abstract

Material Feminism and Epigenetics: A ‘Critical Window’ for Engagement?

Cited by 6 publications

References 58 publications

Gender Beneath the Skull: Agency, Trauma and Persisting Stereotypes in Neuroepigenetics

Gender Beneath the Skull: Agency, Trauma and Persisting Stereotypes in Neuroepigenetics

Normative implications of postgenomic deterministic narratives: the case study of epigenetic harm

‘Nonetheless biosocial’: experiences and embodied knowledge of birth cohort participants in the UK and Brazil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About