I read the review on the BMJ blog as I thought it would be interesting to get a ’medical’ perspective on the book. Overall I wasn’t particularly comfortable with this review, and felt that I disagreed with the reviewer on quite a few points - some factual, some interpretative.
The reviewer describes the book as offering a ‘revised history spanning from the ancient Greeks to the present day, one which places women at the centre of medical discovery, knowledge, and practises.’ Rather than being a revision of history, which suggests that it may be amending or correcting previously known historical facts, I would describe it as offering ‘a different view on medical history’. And rather than placing women ‘at the centre of medical discovery, knowledge and practices’ I would say it ‘demonstrates how women and female bodies have been marginalised and ignored through many centuries of medical practice’.
The review claims that each chapter focuses on ‘one or more ‘female illnesses’ which have been routinely medicalised and pathologised ’. While partly true, I feel this is misleading - the book doesn’t have a chapter on MS, a chapter on menopause, a chapter on pregnancy etc., but rather looks at ‘female illnesses’ as they’ve been treated through history. The basic structure is chronological: Ancient a Greece to the Nineteenth Century; the Late Nineteenth Century to the 1940s; 1945 to the present. Within these parts the focus changes according to the major thinking of the time. Menstruation and pregnancy are themes which run throughout, of course, and only in the last few chapters do MS, fibromyalgia, endometriosis, chronic fatigue syndrome, lupus etc. get addressed by name - although a is made clear, many of these are conditions which had been observed (and dismissed) for many centuries. Almost the first quarter of the review is given over to a substantial summary of one case study in the book; although this is indeed a case which Cleghorn herself considers in detail, this felt like giving this one instance too much weight in the review.
The review comments that Cleghorn is very UK-focussed, only briefly touching on Western Europe and North America. It is true that the book is definitely UK-centric, but I felt that North America was very much included, particularly in the more recent developments. Discussion of the fight for women’s suffrage, racial equality, and access to birth control shows clearly how these are intersectional issues, not standalone matters, and the contemporaneous developments in the USA and UK are considered alongside one another.
It is true that the book looks almost solely at cis women’s issues; however, there is acknowledgement of some of the health issues faced by queer, trans, and non-gender conforming people. For most of history, non-binary and trans people have been utterly marginalised and overlooked or seen as some sort of rarity or freaks; only recently has there been any growing awareness or understanding of the prevalence of non-gender conforming people - and acceptance of their need for appropriate support and medical care is still horrifyingly scant. As the reviewer admits, this book is examining a new area of study, so there is a limit to the issues which can be addressed. Hopefully other works will be forthcoming which look at some of these other issues.
I strongly agree with the reviewer’s conclusion that Unwell Women is ‘a thoughtful and thorough read’, but definitely feel that she didn’t present a true reflection of the book.
Comentarii