This paper will unfold in two different critiques, first dealing with how neuroscience has sexed the brain, ignoring cultural elements of gender formation, and further focusing on the masculine bias of neuroscience research, which, we claim, adopts male physiological and social patterns as “normal”. In order to do so, we will start our investigation with some insights on the sex/gender debate and how it is of consequence for research on neurosciences of sexuality. Secondly, we will critic the way studies are (...) focusing on differences rather than similarities between genders, and how such strategy re-enforces gender biases. Finally, we use contributions from social cognitivist theory and feminism to support a more complex view of body, identity and gender performance. (shrink)

Building from recent attempts in the humanities and social sciences to conceive of creative, entangled ways of doing interdisciplinary work, I turn to Braidotti’s ‘nomadic ontology’ to (re)vision the human body without a brain. Her exploration of the body as a ‘threshold of transformations’ is put into conversation with Deleuze’s comments on neurobiology to consider what a brainless body might do, or undo, in neuroscientific practice. I ground discussion in a case study, detailing the practices of brain decoding or ‘mind (...) reading,’ re-interpreting Rose’s account. Therein, I argue that the technical-social configurations of brain decoding are unlikely to usher in a radically new ontology, as Rose suggests. To better match Rose’s vision and align with new ontologies in cultural theory, I argue that neuroscience must become nomadic and embrace a body without a brain. I then conclude with six recommendations towards a nomadic neuroscience. (shrink)

Scientists’ identities and social locations influence their work, but the content of scientific work can also influence scientists. Theory from feminist science studies, autoethnographic accounts, interviews, and experiments indicate that the substance of scientific research can have profound effects on how scientists are treated by colleagues and their sense of belonging in science. I bring together these disparate literatures under the framework of professional cultures. Drawing on the Survey of Earned Doctorates and the Web of Science, I use computational social (...) science tools to argue that the way scientists write about sex in their research influences the future gender ratio of PhDs awarded across 53 subfields of the life sciences over a span of 47 years. Specifically, I show that a critical paradigm of “feminist biology” that seeks to de-essentialize sex and gender corresponds to increases in women’s graduation rates, whereas “sex difference” research—sometimes called “neurosexism” because of its emphasis on essential, categorical differences—corresponds to decreases in women’s graduation rates in most fields. (shrink)

This book begins well. Blank first gives, for the benefit of lay readers and those unfamiliar with the area of neuroscience, a brief but informative description of the structure and workings of the brain itself. He then goes on to offer an overview of the current state of brain intervention ranging from direct brain intervention (electroconvulsive therapy, electronic and magnetic stimulation, psychosurgery and neural implants), psychotropic drugs, the use of virtual reality, nootropics and neurogenetics. Blank offers a concise summary and (...) evaluation of each of these methods, outlining both potential benefits and risks. He makes the important point that most of these methods, however, do not present a cure, but rather are aimed at altering behaviour, raising the important question as the ethics of behavioural control for social convenience – particularly in relation to the vulnerable, such as the management of children with ADHD.Blank then offers a well-researched and balanced overview .. (shrink)

O objetivo deste trabalho é apresentar as críticas feitas por neurocientistas às pesquisas que buscam diferenças cognitivas entre homens e mulheres presentes no cérebro, principalmente, utilizando o respaldo da neuroimagem. Desde o início dos anos 2000, a preocupação com a utilização da neurociência para justificar estereótipos de gênero e a falta de critério dos responsáveis para diferenciar as expressões “sexo” e “gênero” têm envolvido diversas neurocientistas no debate mais profundo entre natureza e cultura apresentado por essas pesquisas. Além disso, é (...) imperativo pensarmos no impacto desses resultados, considerando que eles fornecem argumentos para os diversos discursos sociais e contribuem muito para o entendimento das habilidades humanas. (shrink)