Chimerism, Mosaicism and the Cultural Construction of Kinship

Sexualities

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 217-232

  Hird, Myra J ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

chimerism; kinship; mosaicism; reproductive technologies; sexual difference

Indexed keywords

EID: 32944457293     PISSN: 13634607     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1363460704042165     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bird, G. et al. (1982) ‘Another Example of Haemopoietic (Twin) Chimaerism in a SubjectUnaware of Being a Twin’, Journal of Immunogenetics 9: 317–322.
2. Brown, N. (1999a) ‘Debates in Xenotransplantation: On the Consequences of Contradiction’, New Genetics and Society 18(2 / 3): 181–196.
3. Brown, N. (1999b) ‘Xenotransplantation: Normalizing Disgust’, Science as Culture 8(3): 327–355.
4. Brown, N. and Michael, M. (2001) ‘Transgenics, Uncertainty and Public Credibility’, Transgenic Research 10: 279–283.
5. Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble. New York and London: Routledge.
6. Cann, R., Stoneking, M. and Wilson, A. (1987) ‘Mitochondrial DNA and Human Evolution’, Nature 325: 31–36.
7. Clarke, A. (2000) Greetings, Carbon-based Bipeds! London: HarperCollins.
8. Donchin, A. (1989) ‘The Growing Feminist Debate over the New Reproductive Tehcnologies’, Hypatia 4(3): 136–149.
9. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000) Sexing the Body. New York: Basic Books.
10. Franklin, S. (1995) ‘Romancing the Helix: Nature andScientific Discovery’, in L. Pearce and J. Stacey (eds) Romance Revisited. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
11. Franklin, S. (1997) Embodied Progress. A Cultural Accountof Assisted Conception. London and New York: Routledge.
12. Franklin, S. (2001) ‘Biologization Revisited: Kinship Theoryin the Context of the New Biologies’, in S. Franklin and S. McKinnon (eds) Relative Values. Reconfiguring Kinship Studies, pp.302–325. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
13. Franklin, S. and McKinnon, S. (eds) (2001) Relative Values. ReconfiguringKinship Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
14. Fraser, M. (1999/2000) ‘Creative Affects’, New Formations 39: 55–69.
15. Haraway, D. (1989) Primate Visions. New York: Routledge.
16. Haraway, D. (1997)Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan©_Meets_Onco Mouse™. New York: Routledge.
17. Haraway, D. (2001) ‘More than Metaphor’,in M. Mayberry, B. Subramaniam and L. Weasel (eds) Feminist Science Studies, pp.81–86. New York: Routledge.
18. Hird, M. J. (2002) ‘Re(pro)ducing Sexual Difference’, Parallax 8(4): 94–107.
19. Hird, M. J. (2003a) ‘From the Culture of Matter to the Matter of Culture: FeministExplorations of Nature and Science’, Sociological Research Online, 8(1) http://www.socresonline.org.uk/8/1/hird.html
20. Hird, M. J. (2003b) ‘Considerations for a Psycho-analytic Theory of Gender Identityand Sexual Desire: The Case of Intersex’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28(4): 1067–1092.
21. Killens, J. (1954) Youngblood. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
22. Lingus, A. (1994) Foreign Bodies. New York: Routledge.
23. Lock, M. (1997) ‘Decentering the Natural Body: Making Difference Matter’, Configurations 5: 267–292.
24. Malinowski, B. (1913) The Family Among Australian Aborigines. London: University of London Press.
25. Margulis, L. and Sagan, D. (1995) What is Life? Berkeley: University of California Press.
26. Margulis, L. and Sagan, D. (1997) What is Sex? New York: Simon and Schuster.
27. Marks, J. (2001) ‘ “ We’re Going toTell These People Who They Really Are”: Science andRelatedness’, in S. Franklin and S. McKinnon (eds) Relative Values. Reconfiguring Kinship Studies,pp.355–383. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
28. Mead, G. H. (1934) Mind, Self and Society. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
29. Michael, M. and Carter, S. (2001) ‘The Facts about Fictions and Vice Versa: Public Understanding ofHuman Genetics’, Science as Culture 10(1): 5–32.
30. Nelson, J. (2002) ‘Microchimerism: Incidental Byproduct of Pregnancy or ActiveParticipant in Human Health?’ Trends in Molecular Medicine, 8(3): 109–113.
31. Neng, Y., Kruskall, M., Yunis, Juan, Knoll, J., Uhl, L., Alosco, S., Ohashi, M., Clavijo, O., Husain, Z., Yunis, Emilio, Yunis, Jorge J. and Yunis, Edmond. (2002) ‘Disputed Maternity Leading to Identification of Tetragametic Chimerism’, New England Journal of Medicine 346(20): 1545–1552.
32. Novas, C. and Rose, N. (2000) ‘Genetic Risk and the Birth of the Somatic Individual’, Economy and Society 29(4): 485–513.
33. Pearson, H. (2002) ‘Dual Identities’, Nature 417(2 May): 10–11.
34. Rackham, M. (2000) ‘My Viral Lover’, RealTime/OnScreen 37(June): 22-23.
35. Schneider, D. (1980[1968]) American Kinship: A Cultural Account. Second Edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36. Strain, L., Warner, J., Johnston, T. and Bonthron, D. (1995) ‘A Human Parthenogenetic Chimaera’, Nature Genetics 11 (October): 164–169.
37. Strain, L., Dean, J., Hamilton, M. and Bonthron, D. (1998) ‘A True Hermaphrodite Chimera Resulting from Embryo Amalgamationafter In Vitro Fertilization’, The New England Journal of Medicine 338(3): 166–169.
38. Strathern, M. (1992) Reproducing the Future: Anthropology, Kinship and theNew Reproductive Technologies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
39. Thompson, C. (2001) ‘Strategic Naturalizing: Kinship in anInfertility Clinic’, in S. Franklin and S. McKinnon (eds) Relative Values. Reconfiguring Kinship Studies, pp.175–202. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
40. Van Dijk, B., Boomsma, D. and de Man, A. (1996) ‘Blood Group Chimerism in Human Multiple Births is Not Rare’, American Journal of Medical Genetics 61: 264–268.
41. Van Loon, J. (2000) ‘Parasite Politics: On the Significanceof Symbiosis and Assemblage in Theorizing CommunityFormations’, in C. Pierson and S. Tormey (eds) Politics at the Edge. New York: St Martin's Press.
42. Waldby, C. (1999) ‘IatroGenesis: The Visible Human Project and the Reproduction of Life’, Australian Feminist Studies 14(29): 77–90.
43. Weinstein, J. (forthcoming) ‘Traces of the Beast: Becoming-Nietzsche, Becoming-Animal, and the Figure of the Trans-Human’, Nietzsche's Bestiary. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
44. Weston, K. (2001) ‘Kinship, Controversy, and the Sharing ofSubstance: The Race/Class Politics of Blood Transfusion’, in S. Franklin and S. McKinnon (eds) Relative Values. Reconfiguring Kinship Studies, pp.147–174. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.