Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case

Chapter 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case Adriano Henrique Nuernberg, Maria Juracy Filgueiras Toneli, Benedito Medrado, and Jorge Lyra Strictly speaking, Feminist Psychology as a recognized, institutionalized area of research and practice does not exist in Brazil. Although the feminist orientation of Gender Studies has had some impact on Psychology, feminist approaches are generally marginalized. They have exerted their strongest influence in the field of Social Psychology, primarily through scholarly work related to the teaching of psychology, research, and intervention. In terms of psychological practice, with the exception of a few nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and professionals who work in clinical settings, feminist theories and Gender Studies have not been influential. This marginalization should be kept in mind as we map the elusive trajectory of feminist influence on Brazilian Psychology – its trends, limits, and possibilities – through a historical analysis of events and documents. As we shall show, the institutional and theoretical trajectories of Psychology and Gender Studies occurred in parallel, with occasional convergences occurring largely through the alliance of Gender Studies with critical social psychology as it developed in the 1970s. We start by A.H. Nuernberg (B) Graduation and Postgraduation Program in Psychology, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC 88015-310, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] M.J.F. Toneli Graduation and Postgraduation Program in Psychology, Margens, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC 88015-310, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] B. Medrado Department of Psychology, Research Group on Gender and Masculinities (Gema/UFPE), Institute Papai, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Av. Acadêmico Hélio Ramos, Cidade Universitária, Recife/Pernambuco, CEP 50670-901, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] J. Lyra Department of Psychology, Research Group on Gender and Masculinities (Gema/UFPE), Institute Papai, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas, Av. Acadêmico Hélio Ramos, Cidade Universitária, Recife/Pernambuco, CEP 50670-901, Brazil e-mail: [email protected] A. Rutherford et al. (eds.), Handbook of International Feminisms, International and Cultural Psychology, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-9869-9_6,  C Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011 109 110 A.H. Nuernberg et al. describing the emergence of Gender Studies in the academic context, move to the history of Brazilian Psychology in the context of Brazil’s unique political history and its women’s movement, and then turn to the relationship between feminism and Psychology and Gender Studies and Psychology. Finally, we examine the area of greatest convergence between Gender Studies and Psychology: Social Psychology. Gender Studies in Brazil Before the 1970s, the, Fundação Carlos Chagas1 (FCC/Carlos Chagas Foundation) was the only Brazilian organization that produced important scholarly material in the area of Women’s Studies, which were only just being introduced into the academy during the 1970s. However, the decade saw an increase in academic activity around women and gender in Brazil. This increase appeared particularly in postgraduate programs and in scientific publications such as theses and journal articles. According to Cynthia Sarti, who in 2004 published an article in Revista Estudos Feministas entitled “O feminismo brasileiro desde os anos 1970: revisitando uma trajetória” (“Brazilian Feminism since the 1970s: Revisiting a trajectory”), there seems to be agreement around the existence of two main trends in feminism within the women’s movement in the 1970s. These trends could serve to summarize the women’s movement itself. The first trend reflects women’s public action, invested in its political organization, and concentrating mainly on issues related to work, rights, health, and redistribution of power between the sexes. These activities influenced public policies when institutional channels opened within the state during the redemocratization period of the 1980s. The second trend centers around the fluid terrain of subjectivity with an emphasis on interpersonal relationships, focusing on the private world as a privileged field. This understanding was enhanced mainly through academic study and reflection among socially conscious groups (Piscitelli, 2004). From an academic standpoint, these trends also characterized the choice of study and research issues of the time. Although these were mostly concentrated and visible in the southeast of Brazil, dozens of nuclei were created in the country to advance academic debate around these matters (Costa, 1994). Violence and health (particularly sexual and reproductive health) were the most prominent topics for these study/research nuclei. The close relationship between academic scholarship and feminist activism helped to refine and establish conceptual reflections on the social, political, and cultural problems women faced. However, while the interaction between these two realms of activities was frequent, it was not always without tension (Adrião, 2008). Nevertheless, the set of questions investigated during this period went far beyond the family context due to Marxist-inspired theories (Saffioti, 1992). Feminist Anthropology was an important field at the time, in part because of the book Mulher, cultura e sociedade (Women, Culture and Society) (Rosaldo & Lamphère, 1979). The writings of North American feminist anthropologist Gayle Rubin were also very influential as they framed sexual differences as a production of social oppression (Rubin, 1986). The dominant theory at the time thus postulated “sexual asymmetry” 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 111 as being bound to “subordination.” This theory served as an analytic framework for most feminist studies produced then. In parallel, although a controversial branch of Psychology, Psychoanalysis was regarded by many Brazilian feminists as a basis for discussions on the constitution of the subject and gender relations. While for some scholars psychoanalysis remains an androcentric theory, for others it has always been an important reference for thinking about the gendered dimension of the subject (Lago, 2001). From a historical perspective, different theoretical traditions have shaped the feminist intellectual field in Brazil. According to Maria Luiza Heilborn and Bila Sorj (1995), the early period of Women’s Studies was largely represented by French scholarly writings on the Sociology of Work (Adelman, 2004). The terminology used for “Women’s Studies,” which was rapports sociaux aux sexe (social relations of sex), reflects the strength of this link to French thought. However, with time the North American influence gradually strengthened, stimulating a transition from the hegemonic use of the category “women” to the use of “gender.” The post-structuralist approach gained strength among researchers and one of the most important papers of that time was “Gender: a useful category of analysis” by Joan Scott (Grossi, 1996; Heilborn & Sorj, 1995; Nuernberg, 2005). However, it is worth mentioning that no consensus exists in Brazil around the current use of gender, since most radical feminist academic researchers do not recognize it politically as far as the categories “woman” and “feminist” are concerned. Researchers using this concept are referred to with a pejorative term “generólogas” (Grossi, 2004). The first civil women’s organizations (beyond the suffragism of the early twentieth century) were established during the social unrest of the 1960s and 1970s and fought for equal rights and the eradication of violence against women in Brazil. During the same period, the first study/research nuclei working on topics related to feminism started to emerge in Brazilian universities. While the active participation of academic women – including psychologists – in the feminist movement did not weaken tensions between academics and activists, this participation allowed the tensions to become less relevant. This situation continues to be true to this day (Adrião, 2008; Heilborn & Sorj, 1995; Nuernberg, 2005). Until the 1970s, the study of women and gender issues was not regarded as a legitimate field of knowledge in Brazil either within or outside universities or in research centers. Through multiple strategies, including the procurement of financial support from international agencies such as the Ford and MacArthur Foundations (which funded research competitions as well as NGO projects), this area of study gradually gained visibility and legitimacy, occupying more and more institutional space in universities. Over the years, the number of research nuclei working on women/gender relations has multiplied with now more than a hundred located around the country (Brasil, 2006; Costa & Sardenberg, 1994; Sardenberg, 2005). As part of the contemporary global feminist movement’s articulation strategy, discussion groups on women’s issues in Brazil share, but are not bound by, the same guiding principles as those in the United States and Europe (Costa & Sardenberg, 1994). Within the university setting, women and gender studies have always had the tripod of academic functions – teaching, research, and extension activities – as their 112 A.H. Nuernberg et al. foundation (Blay, 1990). These groups developed diverse activities, ranging from fund-raising for researchers, developing new under- and postgraduate curricula and programs on women and gender relations, collecting and analyzing information on disciplines that addressed women and gender issues, and lastly, systematizing and analyzing academic publications on these topics (Costa, 1986; Blay, 1990; Blay & Costa, 1992; Costa, 1994). To complement their activities within the university setting, these groups built awareness and defended women’s rights in the community through various types of engagements. These included extracurricular activities (i.e., conference series, films, debates etc.), collaborative work with consultancy agencies and governmental departments working on poverty reduction and income generation programs or even with popular movements, unions, religious associations, and other feminist groups. Some of these collaborative projects offered direct public services to women, such as psychological support for victims of violence, literacy classes, and professional training for adult women (Blay, 1990; Blay & Costa, 1992; Costa, 1994). In their historical analysis of the field of Gender Studies in Brazil, Heilborn and Sorj (1995) highlight the ways in which the field became institutionalized. In so doing, they describe the contributions the concept of gender made to the social sciences and identify the main issues that were investigated. According to these scholars, the relationship between feminist movements, scientific organizations and university departments in Brazil was less conflictual than in other countries, such as the USA. The university was understood as a place for the formation and development of feminist action. As Jeni Vaitsman (1994) argues, the university was included in the “feminist project” as a way of creating new spaces for discussions about conditions affecting women. As Elizabeth Souza-Lobo (1991) explains, the emergence of women’s reflection – or consciousness raising – groups was one of the most important outcomes of feminist movements around the world. These groups’ activities centered primarily on raising awareness among participants about the subordinated condition of women in society. At the same time, participants became cognizant of the growing feminine collectivity responsible for turning issues that were traditionally considered private into political ones (Aguiar, 1997a, 1997b). Many of these groups were created within universities, particularly in Psychology Departments (Azeredo, 1998; Smigay & Afonso, 1988). In fact, since the inception of the Brazilian feminist movements, the majority of female scholars within them came from social science departments (Nuernberg, 2005). These scholars, who were active in social movements to improve living conditions for women, created their own nuclei – many of them interdisciplinary groups – to study gender issues. What became known as Women’s Studies, and later Gender Studies, is partly a result of an integration of funding bodies in the national scientific community. In the classic works by Costa, Barroso, and Sarti (1985) and by Costa and Bruschini (1992b), Women and Gender Studies in Brazil is said to have developed across three crucial moments: 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 113 (1) From 1970 to 1975, a struggle took place for the recognition of Women’s Studies as a field of social analysis addressing concerns of the feminist movement that had not yet assumed the status of academic and scientific thematic research. According to Albertina Costa and Cristina Bruschini (1992a), Fundação Carlos Chagas began organizing a seminar on Women’s Studies in São Paulo in 1974. Their main objective was to promote the visibility of women as agents and subjects of history and of social organization. It is worth mentioning that 1975 was also International Women’s Year, which triggered a series of historic episodes for Brazilian feminism (Barroso, 1975). (2) The year 1978 represented a turning point with two important events: the Seminários sobre mulher e trabalho (Women and Work Seminars) and the first FCC-sponsored awards for researchers in Women’s Studies. From that year onward, research was undertaken on numerous issues affecting women, stemming from gender inequalities in relation to labor, family, health, and education, not to mention others, such as violence and feminine identity. This period was characterized by the increased number of theses and dissertations on women’s lives, as well as the institutionalization of Women’s Studies within the academy and foundations, such as the FCC (Costa, 1994). (3) Since the early 1980s, informal networks began to form among female scholars. In addition, efforts to expand the horizons became evident with the emergence of studies on gender relations in reaction to the biologization of “sex.” During this time, theories of the dichotomies of submission/domination between men and women became more visible. Bila Sorj’s article (2004) brings elements to support the statement that the development of the field, from the second half of the 1980s on, was characterized by the growing complexity of the analyses based on the category of gender, on the improvement of the uses of such a category in the investigation of institutional processes, and on the improvement of the interfaces of gender with questions of class, generation, and ethnicity, among others (Stolcke, 2004). Other milestones in the development of Gender Studies, according to Sorj, include the thematic diversification and the increasing valorization of academic profiles in research programs that sponsored gender-related research. As for the relationship between academics and those engaged in feminist activism, it is important to recognize the tensions that existed between them, especially by female scholars within the academy (Adrião, 2008; Costa et al., 1985). Many female scholars were criticized for the feminist content in their work. That is, feminist activists argued that undertaking academic work on gender relations should not be an end in itself, but rather a way to call attention to the inequalities between the sexes. Research on gender-related issues thus became scrutinized based on the level of scholars’ engagement in women’s activism. As a result, women’s activism determined for scholars which research areas needed investment (Costa et al., 1985). This is illustrated by work on issues such as women’s employment that was dominant in Women’s Studies to the end of the 1970s. However, despite its relevance, 114 A.H. Nuernberg et al. most of the work was, according to the above authors, relegated to the “ghetto” of the social sciences. Across this time, the FCC, which as we mention in the introduction to this section, was the only Brazilian organization that produced important scholarly material in the area of Women’s Studies before the 1970s, was pivotal. Indeed, the FCC scientific journal, Cadernos de Pesquisa, played an important role in consolidating the field of Gender Studies in Brazil (Costa & Bruschini, 1992a; Goldberg, 1989; Sorj, 2004). This was the most important journal to develop and disseminate Gender Studies in the country. The field’s key formative moments are illustrated in it, as well as the evolution of research questions based on discussions about work, family, political participation, and sexual roles. Institutionalization and Development of Psychology in Brazil In 1932, psychology courses started to be offered in the philosophy department of Universidade de São Paulo (USP). This initiative was led by Annita Cabral and Lourenço Filho who intended to articulate scientific questions with progressive theories of a philosophical nature. More than two decades later, specifically in 1953, the first psychology program was created in the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro. The creation of a second program followed a few years later at the Universidade de São Paulo. Yet, it was not until 1962 that the law regulating Psychology as a profession was officially announced by former President João Goulart (Russo, 2002). As Psychology emerged as a discipline in Brazil, several approaches predominated. Whereas the period from 1930s to 1950s involved a struggle between Lewinian theories and the development of psychometric procedures, the 1960s onward gave way to behaviorist-oriented Experimental Psychology shaping the theoretical-methodological trends of the field. Around the same time, psychoanalysis – which had been known in Brazil since 1930 – began to expand and was incorporated into the new curricula of university programs, which were being implemented all over the country in the 1970s.2 The first record of this process comes in the form of a book entitled Psicologia Diferencial, in which Dante Moreira Leite (1966) called attention to the importance of socialization in the production of differences between men and women, ahead of the appearance of studies on women throughout the following decade (1950–1960s) (Graciano, 1976). Later, in the 1970s, female researchers from the Fundação Carlos Chagas brought feminist perspectives into discussions within Psychology, critiquing much of North American Psychology. The studies published in 1975 by these scholars represent a developmental milestone within the field. During that time, the FCC group also influenced the pioneering studies of psychologists on issues central to feminism, such as violence against women. That period continued until the end of the 1980s, when the function of psychology’s knowledge was merely to support valuable argumentations from activism and give a consistent empirical base. 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 115 The expansion of psychoanalytic thought within Psychology – reflected by the formalization of the profession itself, therapeutic procedures, and a way of understanding the human being – pushed the field to reflect on itself. This in turn led to a progressive and steady move within the field away from its “psychometric” origins toward providing clinical or therapeutic assistance as a privileged activity (Russo, 2002). As individualist ideologies strengthened within some contexts in the Brazilian intellectualized urban middle class, as well as the national imaginary, psy knowledge became more valued, and psychology professionals more solicited. The field’s theoretical plurality started to be recognized in the 1970s, in spite of tensions existing between the psychometric and psychoanalytic schools of thought. Indeed, other influences within the field became apparent, including the antipsychiatry movement and the works of French scholars, such as the philosopher Michel Foucault. Many eminent French and North American psychologists were influential in the implementation and consolidation of Psychology programs in Brazilian universities. The great relevance of behaviorist theories at Universidade de Brasília (UnB), structural theories and Social Psychology at Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), and lastly Experimental Psychology at Universidade de São Paulo, can be understood by taking into consideration this network of influences on the expansion of university teaching in Psychology in Brazil (Machado, 2001). Women scholars played an important role in the consolidation process of Brazilian Psychology. Chief among them are Annita Cabral, Helena Antipoff (1892–1974), who contributed to the field’s scientific and practical development (Campos, 2003), and Carolina Bori (1924–2004), who was largely responsible for the dissemination and development of Psychology. Bori was distinguished in contexts of higher education and scientific production, acting as president of the Sociedade Brasileira para o Progresso da Ciência (SBPC; Brazilian Society for the Progress of Science) between 1986 and 1989, and later honorary president of this important Brazilian scientific organization (Plonski & Saidel, 2001). Overall, however, before the 1970s, the study of gender within Psychology was limited to the area of Differential Psychology, which considers individual and group differences without accounting for their historical and cultural origins. Feminism and Psychology One figure largely responsible for the popularization of feminism in Brazil was Carmen da Silva, a psychologist who wrote articles for Revista Cláudia (a magazine aimed at a female readership). Through her articles in the section A arte de ser mulher (The art of being a woman), published between 1963 and 1985, da Silva spread feminist ideas on marital and love relations, virginity, feminine sexuality, and women’s professional achievements, among other issues that were considered “ahead” of their time. Indeed, these ideas influenced a whole generation of women and researchers (Borges, 2008; Goldberg, 1989). 116 A.H. Nuernberg et al. In Brazil, most feminist researchers have basic academic training in Psychology or other social sciences, such as Anthropology and Sociology. Social representations of Psychology denote the discipline as “feminine” because its university program is in part composed of psychosocial care, which is typically assigned to women in society, and also because more women go into this area than men (Conselho Federal de Psicologia, 2001; Yamamoto & Castro, 1998). However, Psychology is also associated with liberal and individualizing ideologies (Jacó-Vilela, 2001; Mancebo, 2002), reflected in feminism through an emphasis on emancipation and human singularity. Nonetheless, feminism and its related issues did not seduce Psychology. Psychology resists the questioning of its universalist assumptions and the quest for invariants and relativization of the “scientific method” (Fonseca, 1997; Siqueira, 1997). In fact, the power struggle surrounding issues related to the legitimacy of what is considered “scientific” is still prevalent in academia. For some scholars, gender is not even a descriptive category, let alone an analytical category. Indeed, in our informal conversations with some of our colleagues, Gender Studies appears to constitute a “fashion” or even an “ideology.” This, we would suggest, is likely to be partly responsible for the absence of the term “feminist psychology” in Brazil. Today, however, established research centers dedicated to feminist and gender issues do exist in many Brazilian universities. Their presence is due to a gradual process (from the 1970s onward) involving the efforts of many researchers who organized conferences and meetings, among other activities, with the support of sponsoring scientific agencies. In a recent online survey from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES; Coordination of Higher Education and Professional Development)3 – responsible for the regulation, funding and evaluation of the stricto sensu postgraduation courses in Brazil – none of the 64 postgraduate programs in Psychology included the terms “feminism” or “feminist psychology” in their titles, in their areas of specialization, and/or in their lines of research. Only one postgraduate program from the Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina incorporated the term “gender” in the description of its areas of specialization or lines of research. However, the website of the Diretório de Grupos de Pesquisa (Research Groups Directory) do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq; National Council for Technological and Scientific Development),4 responsible for funding research and scholarship in the country, showed 281 research groups registered in the field of psychology, 65 of which include “gender” in their names or description; 2 include the term “feminism” (Universidade Federal de Pernambuco e Universidade Federal do Pará); although none use the term “feminist psychology.” Although there are many research groups within Psychology working with gender and feminist approaches, we would argue that the discipline is, in our country, resistant or slow in its acceptance of feminism compared to other social sciences because Psychology has as yet been unable to create specific postgraduate programs. Nonetheless, although not numerous, these research groups carry out undergraduate and postgraduate teaching, alongside their research and extension activities. Hence, they are responsible for the education in gender studies and feminism that does exist in Psychology in Brazil. 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 117 Gender Studies and Psychology Published articles on women and gender during the 1970s and 1980s reflect Psychology’s direct and indirect participation insofar as they discussed (a) the socialization/education process and the production of gender differences between boys and girls; (b) within a broader discussion of woman and work, psychology as a feminine profession, or concern with women because of notions of care and because there are more women than men in the discipline; (c) studies about sexual stereotypes and their transmission through school and family;5 (d) analysis of children’s literature; (e) discourse analysis on maternal duties; and (f) reconciling the desire to pursue motherhood with participation in the labor market. During the 1970s, Social Psychology made a solid contribution to studies on the assignment, acquisition, and performance of sexual roles, generally through the use of evaluation scales and instruments (a point to which we will return). However, the study of women gradually made more use of approaches within Anthropology, such as ethnography. This transition took place around 1985 and coincided with the emergence of sexual, ethnic, and gender identity studies. The beginning of the 1990s saw the creation of two of the most important academic publications in the field of Gender Studies. With its first issue published in 1992, the Revista Estudos Feministas (Journal of Feminist Studies) was initially based at Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) and Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) and is today based at Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC). A year later, in 1993, Cadernos Pagu was launched in Universidade de Campinas (UNICAMP). Both of these journals have disseminated key feminist theory–driven research undertaken by female and male scholars nationally as well as internationally. However, Psychology has been less well represented in these publications than have other social sciences, such as Anthropology, Sociology, and Political Science. Despite the scientific community’s insistence on regarding gender as an “ideological” concept, gender has been increasingly used as a category to enhance understandings of issues that traditionally characterize social science disciplines in Brazil. There is no theory, nor scholar, representing a consensus in Women and Gender Studies in Brazil. Nevertheless, interdisciplinary work appears to be central to advances in the field. In fact, interdisciplinarity is the most important and effective work strategy for the intellectual development and participation of scholars in the scientific community. Gender and Social Psychology in Brazil A brief historical overview of Social Psychology in Brazil will serve to explain its receptivity to Gender Studies. While social psychological research in Brazil can be traced back to the 1930s, Social Psychology was only taught at the university level from the 1940s onward. As mentioned above, Social Psychology first officially became part of the philosophy program at the Universidade de São Paulo. 118 A.H. Nuernberg et al. At the time, the main theoretical references included Kurt Lewin’s field theory and the pragmatic theories also developed by North American scholars. Between the 1950s and 60s, Brazilian Social Psychology distinguished itself through studies on group dynamics, human relations and national character studies, as well as questions related to popular education and consciousness raising (Molon, 2001). During the 1970s, Ecléa Bosi, from Universidade de São Paulo, introduced Simone Weill’s writings to audiences in Brazil. This French scholar was an important theoretical critic of the world of work and of women and influenced Bosi’s thesis, based on the collection of memories from elderly people in São Paulo. Bosi’s work represented a critical Social Psychology of the time that focused on women. Her seminal writings centered on the reading habits of workers from the outskirts of São Paulo and on mass culture from a Marxist perspective (Bosi, 1998). Sylvia Leser de Mello, another scholar from USP, coauthored and supervised the first writings on homosexuality from a social norms perspective within Brazilian Social Psychology (Mello & Sell, 1987; Sell, 1988). Since the 1970s, a select group of social psychologists – at Universidade de São Paulo, Pontifícias Universidades Católicas, and Fundação Carlos Chagas – have distinguished themselves from others by formulating questions on sexual differences based on a critique of the status quo and the hegemony of positivist assumptions about “science.” Historical materialism is the main theoretical strand that has influenced Social Psychology throughout Latin America. Both Lane and Codo (1984) and Martin-Baró (1985) suggested this theoretical model in response to the reductionist framework emanating from the positivist-oriented Social Psychology that was prevalent between the 1950s and 1970s. In comparing features of Social Psychology courses and programs in Brazil, Ozella (1996), describes how historical materialism also replaced cognitivism from the early 1980s onward. The foundation of the Associação Brasileira de Psicologia Social (ABRAPSO), in 1980 reflects a historical milestone within critical Social Psychology. Its establishment was in reaction to two situations affecting the potential development of the field at the time. First, the Associação Latino Americana de Psicologia Social (Latin American Association of Social Psychology), founded during the 1960s by Aroldo Rodrigues and other experimental psychologists, was predominantly constituted by positivist-oriented social psychologists (Bernardes, 1998). Second, members of the Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia (Brazilian Society of Psychology) were unsympathetic to research being undertaken by critical social psychologists. This led to discussions, at both regional and national ABRAPSO meetings, on the shaping of Social Psychology’s trajectory in Brazil. As a result, Social Psychology in Brazil constituted itself not only as a discipline engaged with social problems but also one that aimed to be theoretically consistent in its intellectual efforts. Several books published by ABRAPSO and the journal Psicologia e Sociedade provide a record of the discipline’s evolution (Freitas, 2000). ABRAPSO has pioneered work in the area of Women and Gender Studies by forming gender-based groups in the context of scientific events. Members of these groups have facilitated the incorporation of feminist-oriented questions regarding 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 119 women and gender for over twenty years. While such questions had been of concern within the social sciences for some time, the work of critical social psychologists contributed to the legitimation of gender as a relevant analytical category for scientific production within Psychology. The incorporation of feminist and gender issues into Brazilian social psychology was at first facilitated by the participation of groups of female psychologists from São Paulo, Minas Gerais, and Rio de Janeiro. Not to be underestimated are the roles played by FCC’s journal Cadernos de Pesquisa and ABRAPSO’s journal Psicologia e Sociedade, as already mentioned, in diffusing and consolidating Gender Studies in Brazil (Costa & Bruschini, 1992a). The journal Psicologia e Sociedade continues to disseminate research, having suffered just one interruption from 1993 through to 1996. However, despite facilitating the dissemination of gender-related research since the 1980s, the journal seems to have lost momentum after 1996. The discussion of gender or feminism has become rarer, although these themes have appeared in some recent papers on the development of subjectivity and social movements (Nuernberg, 2005). To this day, ABRAPSO’s national meetings have served to enhance the visibility of Social Psychological research produced in Brazil. In November 2009, its XV Encontro Nacional/XV National Meeting took place in Maceió (northeast of Brazil). Entitled “Psicologia social e políticas de existência: suas fronteiras e conflitos” (“Social Psychology and Subsistence Policies: Boundaries and Conflicts”), the program included more than 1,800 scientific and cultural activities, investigations and other work organized across ten different thematic areas related to social transformation. Of the total number of presentations registered for the meeting, 2046 were classified under the thematic area “Gender, Sexuality, Race and Age.” ABRAPSO’s Social Psychology books on gender issues should also be recognized for their role in consolidating Gender Studies in Brazil. These books are published in different thematic areas centered on problems relevant to a feminist agenda, such as violence, abortion, and work, as well as more theoretical or conceptual concerns on feminist epistemology, which have recently generated discussion. Psychology in Brazil continues to be characterized by the relative invisibility of feminist contributions, substantiated by the low numbers of gender-related postgraduate research projects and the ongoing critique from theoretical traditions that devalue gender analysis (Strey, 1998). Role of Interdisciplinarity Overall, it is important to recognize a game of mutual reference: In considering academic production within the social sciences, it is clear that Gender Studies dialogues less with Psychology than with other disciplines, such as Sociology and Anthropology. Gender is not even regarded as a relevant analytical category in mainstream Psychology. Yet, many publications in the social sciences are managed by professionals with an academic background in Psychology, who graduated in the social sciences at a postgraduate level, either because of their dissatisfaction 120 A.H. Nuernberg et al. with the theoretical production in Psychology or because postgraduate programs in psychology do not exist in many of the country’s inland regions. Interdisciplinarity is a scientific attitude assumed by the representatives of this critical approach in Social Psychology; it is also what best reconciles theoretical research with the demands set out by social movements (Spink & Menegon, 1999). This becomes even more evident when a traditionally interdisciplinary field, such as Gender Studies, joins Social Psychology. It might even be argued that Gender Studies fostered interdisciplinarity within social psychology by making use of feminist theoretical and methodological frameworks to challenge the discipline. Brazilian social psychology also recognized “psychosocial practices with women” as a legitimate practice in a book published in 1992 by the Conselho Federal da Psicologia (Federal Council of Psychology) (Bomfim, Campos, & Freitas, 1992), which describes Gender Studies as an important emergent field, citing a series of articles produced in the area. In addition to ABRAPSO, Associação Nacional de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação em Psicologia (ANPEPP; National Association for Research and Post-Graduates in Psychology) and the Sociedade Brasileira de Psicologia (SBP) are two other psychological research institutions that embraced Women and Gender Studies. However, these two research institutions have addressed gender issues in slightly different ways. On the one hand, ANPEPP was somewhat ambivalent about Gender Studies both in terms of the creation and sustainability of work groups and in the adoption of feminist perspectives. On the other hand, SBP focused its work on sexual differences, sharing similar theoretical and methodological strands with ABRAPSO, yet not giving as much consideration to political factors. Social Psychology came together with feminist analysis through two key articles published in the journal Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, which is distributed to all members of the Conselho Federal de Psicologia (Federal Council of Psychology). The first article is entitled “Afinal, por que somos tantas psicólogas? (So why are there so many [female] psychologists?”), in which Rosemberg7 (1984) discussed the reasons why Psychology is considered a feminized profession. In the second article, entitled “Gênero: o que é isso?” (“Genre: What’s that?”), Guedes (1995) summarized Joan Scott’s arguments and recuperated the contributions of the gender category for Psychology. Both articles introduced feminist arguments to Brazilian Psychology, demonstrating the relevance of gender-based questions for the specific scientific discipline. Masculinity Studies The second part of the 1990s saw the production of important research on masculinity and fatherhood undertaken by social psychologists working in academia (e.g., Arilha, 1999a; Lyra, 1997, 1999; Medrado, 1997, 1998; Siqueira, 1997) or nongovernmental organizations (e.g., Instituto Papai, ECOS, SOS Corpo, Instituto Promundo).8 These organizations developed research, interventions, and advocacy strategies from a feminist perspective. Research groups from postgraduate 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 121 psychology programs such as Margens/UFSC and Gema/UFPE have also provided a space for the production of dissertations and theses on men and masculinities. These researchers recognize the relevance of feminist perspectives and sexuality research for the study of masculinities. Ultimately, the feminist and LGBT movements in Brazil have promoted a critical examination of and positioning before the existing social asymmetry based on sexual differentiation and have demanded in turn new reflections on sexual identities that challenge a hegemonic masculinity that is white, heterosexual, and dominant. Final Considerations Examining the theoretical and institutional trajectories of Gender Studies and Psychology in Brazil offers an assessment of Psychology’s response to pressing social demands seen from a feminist perspective. Although the term “feminist psychology” has not taken hold in Brazil, this chapter illustrates the extent to which many of the questions originally proposed by feminists have today been incorporated into psychological research, especially social psychological research. Over their thirty-five years of existence, Women and Gender Studies have gradually overcome naturalizing assumptions around sexual differences by refining concepts and theories from functionalist and/or socio-cultural orientations. Gender Studies in Brazil paralleled the field’s trajectory in Europe and the USA insofar as it historicized and politicized the notion of gender while retaining the notions of nature and body (Haraway, 2004). The impact of Gender Studies in Psychology was evidenced in another period that helped to overcome naturalizing and essentialist ideas, through the diffusion of the gender category. The liberal paradigm that suffused the times in which Gender Studies emerged (Haraway, 2004) resulted in a refined critique of the biological stance based on constructionist concepts. The political strand of feminist arguments, however, was taken up by a specific segment of Brazilian Psychology that was more aware of social movements, namely, Social Psychology. Given that it was crucial to maintain a universal subject and avoid ideology in mainstream Psychology, feminism was integrated into that part of the disciplinary matrix that opposed the traditional model of science, in the same critical way that feminist theories became allied to postmodernism (Flax, 1994, 1990). Gender Studies in Brazil established alliances with theories and fields that valued culture, the social context, and the active and subjective dimensions of subjects. Defined by these characteristics, Social Psychology represented a space in which such questions could emerge and be taken up within Psychology. The appearance of gender-based questions in Brazilian social psychology was concomitant with the appearance of other key categories in the area. Identity studies (Ciampa, 1987) and research on affectivity and emotions (Lane & Sawaia, 1995), for example, also appeared between the 1980s and the 1990s (Molon, 2000). According to Freitas (2000), Brazilian social psychological concerns during that time converged increasingly on microstructural levels, psychosocial processes, and everyday issues. By valorizing themes advocated by social movements, social psychologists 122 A.H. Nuernberg et al. turned questions arising from political activism or from personal lives into scientific problems. These were then addressed through the use of academic instruments for the production of knowledge that could meet the interests of feminism. The fact that interdisciplinarity is familiar to Brazilian social psychological researchers is also important when considering the proximity of Gender Studies to Social Psychology. As it is a field that favors exchange between different disciplines, and permits the integration of knowledge from other disciplinary matrices such as Anthropology, Sociology, Psychology, and History, Gender Studies have a better dialogue with Social Psychology. There is much in common between the theories circulating within gender studies and the positions held by Brazilian social psychologists after their rupture from the Anglo-American trend. They share a critique of the positivist model of science and deterministic approaches, mainly those that reduce understandings of human processes to the laws of nature. Both also make an effort to valorize subjectivity through perspectives that recover the active dimension of the subject in her/his personal construction and the priority of culture over nature in explaining actors in these process (Freitas, 2000; Molon, 2001). In an article that compared feminist theories of gender and the theory of social representations, Arruda (2002) argued that the empathy of the two theoretical areas resides in the similarities in their origins as fields of knowledge, concerned with the demands of active minorities; on the flexibility and creativity of their theoreticalmethodological propositions; and because both are founded on epistemological references that question binaries (such as nature/culture, objective/subjective) and assume relational and critical perspectives. Considering that, at least in part, these affinities are also present in the historical, phenomenological, psychoanalytic, poststructuralist, and constructionist materialistic frame of reference that circulate in Brazilian Social Psychology, it is possible to add this argument to those mentioned above, in order to understand the relationship of Gender Studies to Brazilian Social Psychology. The relevance of this point is that it is rather different from what has occurred in other scientific contexts. Although there is a dialogue between Gender Studies and American or European Social Psychology, the exchange is intensified in Brazil. Another interesting point is that US “feminist psychology” does not constitute a reference for most psychologists/researchers who identify with feminism in Brazil (Azeredo, 1998). Although assumptions in US feminist psychology have had a strong influence on many Brazilian scholars and activists, and although their research areas are very similar, there are almost no references to this perspective in academic work in Brazil. This is also the case for the referencing of the work of US social, clinical, and cognitive psychologists whose work has had almost no impact on the theoretical base of the Brazilian research mentioned. From this historical analysis, it is evident that in Brazil, no single field has developed to address feminist and gender-related issues. Rather, these issues have been incorporated across the humanities and social sciences. In Psychology, the area that has taken up these issues, making them visible, has been Social Psychology. Within this area of Psychology, there has been a gradual incorporation of feminist theories 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 123 from thinkers such as Judith Butler, Nancy Fraser, Rosi Braidoti, and Eve Seidgwig, among many others. Another possible explanation for this disconnect between US and Brazilian Gender Studies is the consolidation of Latin American identity among Brazilian social psychologists during the 1980s and the 1990s, which resulted in a resistance to foreign theoretical influences (Freitas, 2000; Sandoval, 2000). In sum, unlike the historical resolution of US feminist psychology, which created a specific context for its development within Psychology, the field of Women and Gender Studies in Brazilian Psychology became embedded in an interdisciplinary area, that of Social Psychology, which shares theoretical and scientific approaches (Amâncio, 2001; Nuernberg, 2005). These differences also reflect the unusual relationship between the academy and the feminist movement in Brazil, when compared to Europe and the USA (Unger, 1993; Crawford and Unger, 2000). We would argue, with Heilborn and Sorj (1995), that the prevalence of academic women in Brazilian feminism and the moderate radicalism of that movement in Brazil – having an attitude of integration rather than rupture – favored the inclusion of Gender Studies in already-established contexts, which in this case is Social Psychology. In short, classic concepts from Social Psychology, such as stereotypes, attitudes, and prejudice were the basis for feminist reflections, which dialogued with Psychology, emerging from a nonuniversity context, that is, from Fundação Carlos Chagas. From 1992, Brazilian Social Psychology went through deep transformations with the participation of Gender Studies, accepting common assumptions about the subject and the subjectivity. Yet the third generation, where we find the work of the last decade and three of the authors of this text (Lyra, 1997; Medrado, 1997; Nuernberg, 2005), works within an already-constituted field, when the category of gender is relatively well recognized in the social and human sciences. Among other tasks, we believe that the role of this third generation is to disclose and deepen the theoretical–methodological achievements of the first two generations. One interesting aspect is the increasing number of male researchers in gender studies (Lyra, 2008). Their originality lies in how they engage with recent social movements and the questions they investigate. Through their work, neglected issues such as masculinity and fatherhood are becoming more common areas of research in social psychology (Arilha, 1999b; Lyra, 1997; Medrado, 1997; Toneli-Siqueira, 1997). The third generation will certainly be responsible for the continuity of gender studies in the coming decades, based on new questions and approaches. They, along with those influenced by the classes, texts, and the guidance of women of the preceding generations, may be able to overcome the ideological role that Psychology has played in the maintenance of gender inequalities (Zanotta-Machado, 1997). Notes 1. Fundação Carlos Chagas is a private, nonprofitable entity, created in 1964 with the aim of managing contests and selective processes. Since 1971, it has been involved in educational research, focusing on gender relations (www.fcc.org.br). 124 A.H. Nuernberg et al. 2. In fact, Psychology in Brazil was not institutionalized until the 1960s. Its institutionalization occurred during the country’s military dictatorship that prevailed until the end of the 1980s (Coimbra, 1995). The discipline’s institutionalization had an impact both on the actions of social movements, which were strongly repressed by political forces, and on scientific and professional fields that were being shaped by military regime demands. 3. For more information visit: www.capes.gov.br, accessed on 22 October 2009. 4. For more information visit: www.cnpq.br, accessed on 22 October 2009. 5. Consulting the INDEX PSI TESES, from BVS-PSI, www.bvs-psi.org.br, on 22 October 2009, it was possible to identify, among 98 theses or dissertations that include the term “gender” – in the title, abstract, or keywords – that the foremost work is a Master dissertation dated from 1986, defended at the Instituto de Psicologia/USP – Psychology Institute (COSTA, A. C. S. Estereótipos de gênero e identidade social: uma análise em termos de estrutura e conteúdo/Gender and Social Identity Stereotypes: an Analysis in Terms of Structure and Content). 6. This issue does not include the 16 works classified in other thematic axes, although the title holds the term “gender.” 7. Fulvia Rosemberg is a psychologist and researcher of FCC. She published important works focusing on gender, highlighting the Brazilian production in the field (Rosemberg, 1997). 8. We recommend a visit to the websites of those organizations. References Adelman, M. (2004). Um lugar ao sol? A teoria feminista e seu lugar no campo das ciências sociais. In M. C. S. Lago, M. P. Grossi, C. T. C. Rocha, O. R. Z. Garcia, & T. Sena (Orgs.), Interdisciplinaridade em diálogos de gênero: Teorias, sexualidades, religiões (pp. 165–175). Florianópolis: Ed. Mulheres. Adrião, K. G. (2008). Encontros do feminismo: Uma análise do campo feminista brasileiro a partir das esferas do movimento, do governo e da academia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis. Aguiar, N. (1997a). Para uma revisão das ciências humanas no Brasil desde a perspectiva das mulheres. In N. Aguiar (Org.), Gênero e siências humanas: Desafio às ciências desde a perspectiva das mulheres (pp. 9–29). Rio de Janeiro: Rosa dos Tempos. Aguiar, N. (1997b). Perspectivas feministas e o conceito de patriarcado na sociologia clássica e no pensamento sociopolítico brasileiro. In N. Aguiar (Org.), Gênero e ciências humanas: Desafio às ciências desde a perspectiva das mulheres (pp. 161–191). Rio de Janeiro: Rosa dos Tempos. Amâncio, L. (2001). O gênero na psicologia: uma história de desencontros e rupturas. Psicologia XV, 1, 9–26. Arilha, M. (1999a). Homens, saúde reprodutiva e gênero: o desafio da inclusão. In K. Giffin & S. H. Costa (Orgs.), Questões da saúde reprodutiva (pp. 455–467). Rio de Janeiro: FIOCRUZ. Arilha, M. (1999b). Masculinidades e gênero: discursos sobre responsabilidade na reprodução. Unpublished master’s thesis, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo. Arruda, A. (2002). Teoria das representações sociais e teorias de gênero. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 117, 127–147. Azeredo, S. (1998). Gênero e a diferença que ele faz na pesquisa em Psicologia. Cadernos Pagu, 11, 55–66. Barroso, C. (1975). Estereótipos sexuais: Possíveis contribuições da psicologia para sua mudança. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 15, 135–137. Bernardes, J. (1998). História. In N. M. G. Bernardes, M. N. Strey, & M. G. Jacques (Eds.), Psicologia social contemporânea (pp. 19–35). Petrópolis: Vozes. Blay, E. A. (1990). Núcleos de estudos universitários sobre mulher no Brasil. In E. Blay (Ed.), Seminário Estudos sobre a mulher no Brasil. Avaliação e perspectivas (pp. 10–12). São Roque, São Paulo: FCC. Blay, E. A., & Costa, A. O. (Orgs.). (1992). Gênero e universidade. São Paulo: NEMGE/USP. 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 125 Bomfim, E., Campos, R. H. F., & Freitas, M. F. Q. (1992). Fazeres em psicologia social. In Conselho Federal de Psicologia, Psicólogo Brasileiro: Construção de Novos Rumos (pp. 125–160). Campinas: Átomo. Borges, J. V. (2008). Gênero e história das mulheres na historiografia. Revista Estudos Feministas, 16(3), 1112–1114. Bosi, E. (1998). Cultura de massas e cultura popular. Leitura de operárias. In P. de S. Oliveira (Org.), Metodologia das ciências humanas (pp. 199–219). São Paulo: UNESP/Hucitec. Brasil. Presidência da República. Secretaria Especial de Políticas para as Mulheres. (2006). Pensando gênero e ciência. Encontro Nacional de Núcleos e Grupos de Pesquisas. Brasília: Secretaria Especial de Políticas para as Mulheres. Campos, R. H. F. (2003). Helena Antipoff: Razão e sensibilidade na psicologia e na educação. Estudos Avançados, 17(49), 209–231. Ciampa, A. C. (1987). A estória do Severino e a história da Severina. São Paulo: Brasiliense. Coimbra, C. M. B. (1995). Guardiões da Ordem: Uma viagem pelas práticas psi no Brasil do ‘milagre’. Rio de Janeiro: Oficina do Autor. Conselho Federal de Psicologia. (2001). Pesquisa WHO. Retrieved from www.pol.org.br Costa, A. C. S. (1986). Estereótipos de gênero e identidade social: uma análise em termos de estrutura e conteúdo. Unpublished master’s thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo. Costa, A. O. (1994). Os estudos da mulher no Brasil ou a estratégia da corda bamba. Revista Estudos Feministas, Especial Number, 401–409. Costa, A. O., Barroso, C., & Sarti, C. (1985). Pesquisa sobre mulher no Brasil – Do limbo ao gueto? Cadernos de pesquisa, 54, 5–15. Costa, A. O., & Bruschini, C. (1992a). Uma contribuição ímpar: Os cadernos de pesquisa e a consolidação dos estudos de gênero. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 80, 91–99. Costa, A. O., & Bruschini, C. (Orgs.). (1992b). Uma questão de gênero. Rio de Janeiro: Rosa dos Tempos. Costa, A. A. A., & Sardenberg, C. M. B. (1994). Teoria e práxis feministas na academia: Os núcleos de estudos sobre mulher nas universidades brasileiras. Revista Estudos Feministas, Especial Number, 387–400. Crawford, M., & Unger, R. (2000). Women and gender: A feminist psychologist. Fairfield, PA: McGraw-Hill. Flax, J. (1990). Psicoanálisis y feminismo: Pensamentos fragmentários. Valência: Cátedra/Instituto de la mujer. Flax, J. (1994). Pós-modernismo e relações de gênero na teoria feminista. In H. B. Hollanda (Org.), Pós-modernismo e política (pp. 217–250). Rio de Janeiro: Rocco. Fonseca, T. M. G. (1997). Psicologia e relações de gênero: O gênero da ciência psicológica. In A. V. Zanella, M. J. T., Siqueira, S. I. Molon, & L. A. Lhullier (Orgs.), Psicologia e Práticas Sociais (pp. 317–321). Porto Alegre: Abrapsosul. Freitas, M. F. Q. (2000). O movimento da lente focal na história recente da psicologia social latinoamericana. In R. H. F. Campos & P. A. Guareschi (Orgs.), Paradigmas em psicologia social: A perspectiva latino-americana (pp. 167–185). Petrópolis: Vozes. Goldberg, A. (1989). Feminismo no Brasil contemporâneo: O percurso intelectual de um ideário político. Boletim Informativo e Bibliográfico de Ciências Sociais, 2, 42–70. Graciano, M. (1976). Dante Moreira Leite face a preconceitos e ideologias sobre caráter nacional. Cadernos de Pesquisa, 17, 9–12. Grossi, M. P. (1996). Na busca do ‘outro’ encontra a ‘si mesmo’. In: Grossi, M. (org.), Trabalho de campo e subjetividade (pp. 7–18). Florianópolis: PPGAS/UFSC. Grossi, M. P. (2004). A Revista Estudos Feministas faz 10 anos: uma breve história do feminismo no Brasil. Revista Estudos Feministas, 12, 211–221. Guedes, M. E. F. (1995). Gênero o que é isso? Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, 1(1, 2, 3), 4–11. Haraway, D. (2004). Gênero para um dicionário marxista. Cadernos Pagu, 22, 201–246. Heilborn, M. L., & Sorj, B. (1995). Estudos de gênero no Brasil. O que ler na Ciência Social brasileira, II, 183–235. 126 A.H. Nuernberg et al. Jacó-Vilela, A. M. (2001). Concepções de pessoa e a emergência do indivíduo moderno. Interações, 12, 11–39. Lago, M. C. S. (2001). Feminismo e psicanálise, ainda. . .. Revista Estudos Feministas, 9(2), 618–625. Lane, S. M. T., & Codo, W. (Orgs). (1984). Psicologia social: O homem em movimento. São Paulo: Brasilense. Lane, S. T. M., & Sawaia, B. B. (Orgs). (1995). Novas veredas da psicologia social. São Paulo: Brasiliense/EDUC. Lyra, J. (1997). Paternidade adolescente: Uma proposta de intervenção. Unpublished master’s thesis, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo. Lyra, J. (1999). Participação masculina na gravidez adolescente. In E. M. Vieira, M. E. L. Fernandes, P. Bailey, & A. Mckay (Orgs.), Seminário Gravidez na adolescência (pp. 119–126). Rio de Janeiro: Associação Saúde da Família. Lyra, J. (2008). Homens, feminismo e direitos reprodutivos no Brasil: uma análise de gênero no campo das políticas públicas (2003–2006). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Departamento de Saúde Coletiva, Centro de Pesquisas Aggeu Magalhães, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Recife. Machado, M. N. M. (2001). Práticas pedagógicas da psicossociologia nos anos 60 e 70. In A. M. Jacó-Vilela, A. C. Cerezzo, & H. B. C. Rodrigues (Orgs.), Fazeres e dizeres psi na história do Brasil (pp. 35–40). Rio de Janeiro: Relumé Dumará/FAPERJ. Mancebo, D. (2002). Modernidade e produção de subjetividades. Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão, 1, 100–111. Martin-Baró, I. (1985). Acción e ideologia: Psicologia social desde Centroamérica. El Salvador: UCA Editores. Medrado, B. (1997). O masculino na mídia. Unpublished master’s thesis, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo. Medrado, B. (1998). Homens na arena do cuidado infantil: Imagens veiculadas pela mídia. In M. Arilha, S. G. U. Ridenti, & B. Medrado (Orgs.), Homens e masculinidades: Outras palavras (pp. 145–161). São Paulo: ECOS/Editora 34. Mello, S. L., & Sell, T. A. (1987). Identidade homossexual e normas sociais. Florianópolis: UFSC. Molon, S. I. (2000). Sujeito, subjetividade e emoções na perspectiva dos professores da Pósgraduação em Psicologia Social vinculados à ABRAPSO. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo. Molon, S. I. (2001). A psicologia social abrapsiana: Apontamentos históricos. Revista Interações, 12, 41–68. Nuernberg, A. H. (2005). Gênero no contexto da produção científica brasileira em psicologia. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis. Ozella, S. (1996). Os cursos de psicologia e os programas de psicologia social: Alguns dados do Brasil e da América Latina. Psicologia e Sociedade, 8(1), 120–143. Piscitelli, A. (2004). Reflexões em torno do gênero e feminismo. In C. L. Costa & S. P. Schmidt (Orgs.), Poéticas e Políticas Feministas (pp. 43–66). Florianópolis: Ed. Mulheres. Plonski, G. A., & Saidel, R. G. (2001). Gender, science and technology in Brazil. Minerva, 39(2), 217–238. doi:10.1023/A:1010340812739. Rosaldo, M., & Lamphère, L. (Orgs.). (1979). A mulher, a cultura, a sociedade. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra. Rosemberg, F. (1984). Afinal, por que somos tantas psicólogas? Psicologia Ciência e Profissão, 4(1), 6–12. Rosemberg, F. (1997). Teorias de gênero e subordinação de idade: Um ensaio. Pro-posições, 7(3), 17–23. Rubin, G. (1986). El tráfico de mujeres: Notas sobre la economía política del sexo. Nueva Antropología, 7(30), 95–145. Russo, J. (2002). O mundo psi no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar. Saffioti, H. (1992). Rearticulando gênero e classe social. In A. O. Costa & C. Bruschini (Orgs.), Uma questão de gênero (pp. 183–215). Rio de Janeiro: Rosa dos Tempos/FCC. 6 Feminism, Psychology, and Gender Studies: The Brazilian Case 127 Sandoval, S. (2000). O que há de novo na psicologia social latino-americana? In R. H. F. Campos & P. A. Guareschi (Orgs.), Paradigmas em psicologia social: A perspectiva latino-americana (pp. 101–109). Petrópolis: Vozes. Sardenberg, C. (2005). Para re-tecer a rede: Reflexões sobre a trajetória da REDOR. Seminário internacional enfoques feministas e o século XXI: Feminismo e Universidade na América Latina. Anais. . .. Salvador: REDOR. Sarti, C. A. (2004). O feminismo brasileiro desde os anos 1970: Revisitando uma trajetória. Revista Estudos Feministas, 12(2), 35–50. Sell, T. (1988). A história de uma identidade: Homossexualidade e normais sociais. In: XVIII Reunião Anual de Psicologia. Caderno de Resumos. Sociedade de Psicologia de Ribeirão Preto, 1, 367–371, Ribeirão Preto, SP. Siqueira, M. J. T. (1997). A(s) psicologia(s) e a categoria gênero: Anotações para discussão. In A. V. Zanella, M. J. T. Siqueira, S. I. Molon, & L. A. Lhullier (Orgs.), Psicologia e Práticas Sociais (pp. 271–279). Porto Alegre: Abrapsosul. Smigay, K. E. V., & Afonso, M. L. (1988). A constituição de um grupo por e para mulheres na instituição universitária – desventuras de quem a viveu. Psicologia e Sociedade, 5, 103–113. Sorj, B. (2004). Estudos de Gênero: A construção de um novo campo de pesquisas no país. In A. O. Costa, A. Martins, & M. L. P. B. Franco (Orgs.), Uma história para contar: A pesquisa da Fundação Carlos Chagas (pp. 118–139). São Paulo: AnnaBlume. Souza-Lobo, E. (1991). O gênero da representação: Movimento de mulheres e representação política no Brasil (1980–1990). Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, 17, 7–14. Spink, M. J., & Menegon, V. M. (1999). A pesquisa como prática discursiva: Superando os horrores metodológicos. In M. J. Spink (Org.), Práticas discursivas e produção de sentidos no cotidiano: aproximações teóricas e metodológicas (pp. 63–92). São Paulo: Cortez. Stolcke, V. (2004). La mujer es puro cuento: la cultura del género. Revista Estudos Feministas, 12(2), 77–105. Strey, M. N. (1998). Gênero. In M. G. Jacques, M. N. Strey, N. M. G. Bernardes, P. Guareschi, S. A. Carlos, & T. M. G. Fonseca (Orgs.), Psicologia social contemporânea (pp. 181–198). Petrópolis: Vozes. Toneli-Siqueira, M. J. F. (1997). A constituição do sujeito e a divisão sexual do trabalho na família: Analise do caso de um homem dono-de-casa. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo. Unger, R. K. (1993). Epistemologia psicológica, feminista e pessoal. In M. M. C. Gergen (Org.), O pensamento feminista e a estrutura do conhecimento (pp. 148–166). Rio de Janeiro: Rosa dos Tempos. Vaitsman, J. (1994). Flexíveis e plurais: Identidade, casamento e família em circunstâncias pósmodernas. Rio de Janeiro: Rocco. Yamamoto, O. H., & Castro, A. E. F. de (1998). A Psicologia como profissão feminina: Apontamentos para estudo. Estudos de Psicologia, 3(1), 147–158. Zanotta-Machado, L. (1997). Estudos de gênero: Para além do jogo entre intelectuais e feministas. In M. R. Schpun (Org), Gênero Sem Fronteiras (pp. 93–139). Florianópolis: Ed. das Mulheres.