STEM fields are commonly considered the purest form of objectivity. They are believed to uncover universal and unbiased insights into the workings of the natural world. However, feminist theory offers a more nuanced perspective. It suggests that science is shaped by the underlying assumptions and perspectives of those conducting it.
IAn example of this is given by the advances Barbara McClintock made in the field of genetics. Until then, DNA was considered the main decisive and steering factor in cellular organization. McClintock broke with this paradigm, proposing a more holistic framework that considers environmental influences as well as interactive processes. In 1983, McClintock was awarded a Nobel Price for her groundbreaking work.
According to Evelyn Fox Keller, the misconception that DNA alone exerts rational control over the chaotic nature of cells mirrors a broader tendency in modern science to dominate nature through rationality. Keller’s feminist analysis reveals a connection to patriarchal ideas. Historically, traits such rationality and objectivity were associated with masculinity, while women were considered emotional and closer to nature. Consequently, science itself reflects these gendered biases and assumptions.
As McClintock’s example shows, changing the underlying assumptions made in science is not only a matter of inclusion but a matter of the validity of science in general. There is no clear distinction between researcher and researched, subject and object. Our experiences and the systems we operate in limit the insights we can have. For genetic researchers, it had been simply impossible to phantom an organism without a rational control center. Acknowledging this situative nature of knowledge is what Keller calls dynamic objectivity. According to her, embracing dynamic objectivity and aiming to understand rather than dominate allows us to start doing science not as a masculine, but as a human project.