Theorising women’s health and health inequalities: shaping processes of the ‘gender-biology nexus’

References

• Connell R. Conclusion: reckoning with gender. In: Messerschmidt JW, Martin PY, Messner MA, et al., editors. Gender reckonings. New York: New York University Press; 2018. p. 87–96.
   Google Scholar
• Birke L. Feminism and the biological body. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Fausto-Sterling A. Sexing the body. New York (NY): Basic Books; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Pitts-Taylor V. Mattering: feminism, science, and corporeal politics. In: Pitts-Taylor V, editor. Mattering. New York: New York University Press; 2016a. p. 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Pitts-Taylor V. The brain’s body. Neuroscience and corporeal politics. Durham: Duke University Press; 2016b.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson E. Gut feminism. Durham: Duke University Press; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Oakley A. Sex, gender and society. London: Temple Smith; 1972.
   Google Scholar
• Annandale E. Women’s health and social change. London: Routledge; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts H, editor. Women, health and reproduction. London: Routledge, Kegan Paul; 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Doyal L. What makes women sick. London: Macmillan; 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Scheper-Hughes N, Lock M. The mindful body: a prolegomenon to future work in medical anthropology. Med Anthropol Q. 1987;1:6–41.
   Google Scholar
• Connell R. Gender. Cambridge: Polity; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Connell R. Gender, health and theory: conceptualizing the issue, in local and world perspective. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74:1675–1683.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bird CE, Rieker PP. Gender and health: the effects of constrained choices and social policies. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Wiklund M, Bengs C, Malmgren-Olsson EB, et al. Young women facing multiple and intersecting stressors of modernity, gender orders and youth. Soc Sci Med. 2010;71:1567–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrett M, Schofield T. Raewyn Connell: gender, health and healthcare. In: Collyer F, editor. The Palgrave handbook of social theory in health, illness and medicine. London: Palgrave; 2015. p. 550–566.
   Google Scholar
• Wiklund M, Ahlgren C, Hammarström A. Constructing respectability from disfavoured social positions: exploring young femininities and health as shaped by marginalisation and social context. A qualitative study in Northern Sweden. Glob Health Action. 2018;11:1519960.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Misra J. Categories, structures and intersectional theory. In: Messerschmidt JW, Martin PY, Messner MA, et al., editors. Gender reckonings. New York: New York University Press; 2018. p. 111–130.
   Google Scholar
• Kapilashrami A, Hankivsky O. Intersectionality and why it matters to global health. Lancet. 2018;391:2589–2591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Springer K, Mager Stellman J, Jordan-Young R. Beyond a catalogue of differences: a theoretical frame and good practice guidelines for researching sex/gender in human health. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74:1817–1824.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selye H. The evolution of the stress concept. Am Sci. 1973;61:692–699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankenhaeuser M, Lundberg U, Fredrickson M, et al. Stress on and off the job as related to sex and occupational status in white-collar workers. J Organ Behav. 1989;10:321–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krieger N. Embodiment: a conceptual glossary for epidemiology. J Epidemiol Commun H. 2005;59:350–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krieger N, Zierler H. Accounting for the health and women. Crit Public Health. 1997;7:38–49.
   Google Scholar
• Krieger N. Gender, sexes, and health: what are the connections – and why does it matter? Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32:652–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fausto-Sterling A. The bare bones of sex: part 1 – sex and gender. Signs. 2005;30:1491–1528.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fausto-Sterling A. Sex/gender: biology in a social world. London: Routledge; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Fausto-Sterling A. Against dichotomy. Evol Stud Imaginative Culture. 2017;1:63–66.
   Google Scholar
• Fausto-Sterling A. Gender/sex, sexual orientation, and identity are in the body: how did they get there. J Sex Res. 2019;56:529–555.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose S. Lifelines: biology, freedom, determinism. Harmondsworth: Penguin; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Birke L. Shaping biology. In: Williams S, Birke L, Bendelow G, editors. Debating biology. London: Routledge; 2000. p. 39–52.
   Google Scholar
• Lock M, Nguyen V-K. An anthropology of biomedicine. 2nd ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke T. Mater and matter: a primary cartography of material feminisms. Soft Power. 2017;5:83–100.
   Google Scholar
• Alaimo S, Hekman S, editors. Material feminisms. Bloomington Indiana: University of Indiana Press; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Barad K. Meeting the universe halfway. Durham: Duke University Press; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Frost S. The implications of the new materialisms for feminist epistemology. In: Grasswick HE, editor. Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: power in knowledge. Switzerland AG: Springer; 2011. p. 69–83.
   Google Scholar
• Coole D, Frost S, editors. New materialisms. Durham: Duke University Press; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Frost S. Biocultural creatures. London: Duke University Press; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Skinner MK. Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility. EMBO Rep. 2011;12:620–622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthman J, Mansfield B. The implications of environmental epigenetics: a new direction for geographic inquiry on health, space, and nature-society relations. Prog Hum Geogr. 2012;37:486–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meloni M, Testa G. Scrutinising the epigenetics revolution. In: Meloni M, Cromby J, Fitzgerald D, et al., editors. The Palgrave handbook of biology and society. London: Palgrave; 2017. p. 191–226.
   Google Scholar
• Weasel L. Embodying intersectionality: the promise (and peril) of epigenetics for feminist studies of science. In: Pitts-Taylor V, editor. Mattering. New York: New York University Press; 2016. p. 104–121.
   Google Scholar
• Niewöhner J, Lock M. Situating local biologies: anthropological perspectives on environment/human entanglements. BioSocieties. 2018;13:681–697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. Female genital mutilation. Key Facts. 2018 [cited 2019 Aug 30]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/female-genital-mutilation.
   Google Scholar
• UN Women. International day of zero tolerance to female genital mutilation. 2018. [cited 2018 Nov 24]. Available from: http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2018/2/statement-ed-phumzile-international-day-of-zero-tolerance-for-fgm.
   Google Scholar
• UNICEF. Female genital mutilation. 2018. [cited 2018 Dec 10]. Available from: https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/female-genital-mutilation/
   Google Scholar
• UNFPA. Bending the Curve: FGM trends we aim to change. 2018. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/resources/bending-curve-fgm-trends-we-aim-change
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Resolution adopted by the general assembly on 18 December 2014. 69/150. Intensifying global efforts for the elimination of female genital mutilations. 2014. [cited 2018 Nov 4]. Available from: http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/69/150
   Google Scholar
• Kandala N-B, Ezejimofor MC, Uthman OA, et al. Secular trends in the prevalence of female genital mutilation/cutting among girls: a systematic analysis. BMJ Glob Health. 2018;3:e000549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordal M, Griffin G. Clitoral reconstruction: understanding changing gendered health care needs in a globalized Europe. Eur J Womens Stud. 2018;25:154–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burrage H. Eradicating FGM. London: Routledge; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• UNICEF. Female genital mutilation/cutting: a statistical overview and exploration of the dynamics of change. New York: UNICEF; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Mwanri L, Gatwiri GJ. Injured bodies, damaged lives: experiences and narratives of Kenyan women with obstetric fistula and female genital mutilation/cutting. Reprod Health. 2017;14:38. Available from.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sagna M. Gender differences in the support for discontinuation of female genital cutting in Sierra Leonne. Cult Health Sex. 2014;16:603–619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Neill S. Purity, cleanliness, and smell: female circumcision, embodiment, and discourses among midwives and excisers in Fouta Toro, Senegal. J Royal Anthropological Inst. 2018;24:730–748.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wardere H. Cut. London: Simon & Schuster; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Andro A, Cambois E, Lesclingand M. Long-term consequences of female genital mutilation in a European context: self perceived health of FGM women compared to non-FGM women. Social Sci Med. 2014;106:177–184.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein E, Helzner E, Shayowitz M, et al. Female genital mutilation: health consequences and complications—a short literature review. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2018. Available from: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ogi/2018/7365715/
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg RC, Underland V, Odgaard-Jensen J, et al. Effects of female genital cutting on physical health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2014. Available from: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/4/11/e006316
   Google Scholar
• Köbach A, Ruf-Leuschner R, Elbert T. Psychopathological sequelae of female genital mutilation and their neuroendocrinological associations. BMC Psychiatry. 2018;18:187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. WHO guidelines on the management of health complications from female genital mutilation. Geneva: WHO; 2016. Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/management-health-complications-fgm/en/
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Care of girls and women living with female genital mutilation. A clinical handbook. Geneva: WHO; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Paakkanen EK. Entitled, powered or victims-an analysis of discourses on male and female circumcision, genital mutilation/cutting and genital cosmetic surgery. Int Hum Rights. 2019. DOI:10.1080/13642987.2019.1612375;
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox M, Thomson M. Foreskin is a feminist issue. Aust Feminist Stud. 2009;25:195–201.
   Google Scholar
• Lee RS, Sawa A. Environmental stressors and epigenetic control of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Neuroendocrinology. 2014;100:278–287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Voorhees E, Scarpa A. The effects of child maltreatment on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2004;5:333–352.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Daskalakis NP, Yehuda R. Programming HPA-axis by early life experience: mechanisms of stress. Front Endocrinol. 2015. DOI:10.3389/fendo.2014.00244/full
   Google Scholar
• Stringhini S, Vineis P. Epigenetic signatures of socioeconomic status across the lifecourse. In: Meloni M, Cromby J, Fitzgerald D, et al., editors. The Palgrave handbook of biology and society. London: Palgrave; 2017. p. 541–589.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly-Irving M, Delpierre C. The embodiment dynamic over the life course: a case for examining cancer aetiology. In: Meloni M, Cromby J, Fitzgerald D, et al., editors. The Palgrave handbook of biology and society. London: Palgrave; 2017. p. 519–540.
   Google Scholar
• Thayer ZM, Kuzawa CW. Biological memories of past environments: epigenetic pathways to health disparities. Epigenetics. 2011;6:1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein G. From body to brain: considering the neurobiological effects of female genital cutting. Perspect Biol Med. 2008;51:84–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einstein G. Situated neuroscience: exploring biologies of diversity. In: Bluhm R, Jaap Jacobson A, Mailbom HL, editors. Neurofeminism. London: Palgrave; 2012. p. 145–174.
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulos D. The imaginary of plasticity: neural embodiment, epigenetics and ecomorphs. Sociology Rev. 2011;59:232–456.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lock M. The tempering of medical anthropology: troubling natural categories. Med Anthropol Q. 2001;15:478–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dirie W. Desert flower. London: Virago; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Morison L, Dirir A, Elmi S, et al. How experiences and attitudes relating to female circumcision vary according to age on arrival in Britain. Ethnic Health. 2004;9:75–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young I. Throwing like a girl. In: Young IM, editor. On female body experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. p. 27–45.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobson D, Glazer E, Mason R, et al. The lived experience of female genital cutting (FGC) in Somali-Canadian women’s daily lives. PLoS One. 2018;13. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0206886
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansen REB. Pain as a counterpoint to culture: toward an analysis of pain associated with infibulation among Somali immigrants in Norway. Med Anthropol Q. 2002;16:312–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rieker P, Bird C. Rethinking gender differences in health: why we need to integrate social and biological perspectives. J Gerontol. 2005;60:S40–S4. Series B.
   Google Scholar
• Sharman Z, Johnson J. Towards the inclusion of gender and sex in health research and funding: an institutional perspective. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74:1812–1816.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar