4.2 Article

Cloaking the Pregnancy: Scientific Uncertainty and Gendered Burden among Middle-class Mothers in Urban China

期刊

SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & HUMAN VALUES
卷 46, 期 1, 页码 3-28

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0162243919900542

关键词

scientific uncertainty; gendered burden; electromagnetic radiation; China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article explores motherhood and reproductive uncertainty in urban China through the lens of radiation-shielding maternity clothes, arguing that scientific uncertainty is socially reproduced by experts, markets, and policy makers. Despite middle-class mothers' lack of full trust in the cloak's scientific reliability, they still choose to wear it during pregnancy for psychological reassurance amid environmental concerns and modern life pressures. Ultimately, these mothers opt to cloak their pregnancies for responsible motherhood while simultaneously expressing doubts about the cloak to showcase their scientific knowledge.
In this article, I use radiation-shielding maternity clothes (cloak) as a window to explore motherhood and reproductive uncertainty in urban China. By engaging with literature on scientific uncertainty and intensive mothering, I argue that the scientific uncertainty over the possible negative impact of electromagnetic radiation (EMF) on pregnancy has led to a situation in which uncertainty is being socially reproduced by experts, markets, and policy makers through different media channels. Middle-class mothers do not fully believe that the cloak is scientifically trustworthy. But under the influence of social networks and the ambient awareness of the reproductive crisis related to environmental pollution and the pressures of modern life, middle-class mothers still choose to wear the clothes for a variable period of pregnancy for psychological feelings of safety. In the end, they choose to cloak their pregnancies (to perform responsible motherhood) but immediately claim their suspicions of the cloak (to perform their scientific knowledge).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据