Gender, Metaphor, and the Definition of Economics
- 1 April 1992
- journal article
- essays
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Economics and Philosophy
- Vol. 8 (1) , 103-125
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s026626710000050x
Abstract
Let me make it clear from the outset that my main point is not either of the following: one, that there should be more women economists and research on “women's issues” (though I think there should be), or two, that women as a class do, or should do, economics in a manner different from men (a position with which I disagree). My argument is different and has to do with trying to gain an understanding of how a certain way of thinking about gender and a certain way of thinking about economics have become intertwined through metaphor – with detrimental results – and how a richer conception of human understanding and human identity could broaden and improve the field of economics for both female and male practitioners.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- HIDDEN BY THE INVISIBLE HAND:Gender & Society, 1990
- Language, Gender, and Professional Writing: Theoretical Approaches and Guidelines for Nonsexist UsageLanguage, 1990
- The Principles of Economics Course: A Handbook for InstructorsThe Journal of Economic Education, 1990
- The Consequences of Economic Rhetoric.The Economic Journal, 1989
- The consequences of rhetoricPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1989
- Patterns, Thinking, and Cognition: A Theory of JudgmentThe American Journal of Psychology, 1989
- The Cartesian Masculinization of ThoughtSigns: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1986
- Reply by Carol GilliganSigns: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 1986
- The Future of DifferenceSubStance, 1982
- Science and the Modern WorldThe American Journal of Psychology, 1927