FOUCAULT'S POINTS OF RESISTANCE
WOMEN IN SCIENCE: 1620 - 2000

Cynthia Gail Vitale, Ed.D.

University of Missouri-St. Louis
July 2000

Abstract

    In his unique method of historical research, Michel Foucault was concerned with how institutional power relations are both established and maintained through discourse, in its broadest sense.  Foucault found that the character of the discourse of any given period of history serves as the foundation of knowledge which is then transformed into power by those who “appropriate,” “bound,” then use it as “technologies of discipline.”  This power operates transparently and serves to “construct” individuals to meet institutional expectations.  Important for this study is that Foucault believed that where there is power there is resistance, and that “points of resistance” operate everywhere in “power networks.”
    This study has two parts.  The first is a description and an extension of Foucault's notion of resistance as it operates within institutional power relations.  The second, using the extended version of Foucault's resistance, is a deconstruction of the discourse of science education in the United States.  The deconstruction focused on resistance operating within the male/female power relations network.
    The deconstruction revealed three overlapping yet distinct historical periods in which the dominant discourse was characterized by one of Foucault's three general technologies of discipline.   During the first period, 1620-1790, women were generally not allowed access to formal (institutional) education. This disciplinary technology, which Foucault called “dividing practices,” was justified by the commonly accepted religious view of the period that females were both mentally and morally inferior beings.  Women were, so to speak, “barred at the schoolhouse gate.”
    In the second period, 1790-1920, female resistance to these dividing practices was parallel to their limited access to formal education.  Women were “admitted at the schoolhouse gate,” and the appearance of successful resistance occurred as women began to enroll in science classes.  Unlike their male counterparts, females were encouraged to take high school science to prepare them to be good mothers and teachers, especially for their male children.  During this period the view of females as mentally and morally inferior to males was supported by “scientific,” rational thought as well as dominant religious beliefs.
    At the beginning of the final period, 1920-Present, the focus of education was on preparing women for the world of work in sex-stereotyped jobs, such as teacher, secretary, and nurse.  Later, the attitude of the general public changed regarding education for women to include preparation for virtually any occupation.
    The sum of past efforts to resist might account for at least a portion of increased access for women in science, but this study revealed that the historically grounded hegemonic objectification of women in the broader society works to nullify many individual efforts to resist.  That is, regardless of the historical period, women can actively participate in their own subjectification, preventing them from fully acquiring the American ideal of access.  Although women have greater access generally, resistance is still essential and operates in many ways in the male/female power relations in science education.

         Return to Completed Studies