Environmental epigenetics is the study of how environmental signals affect gene expression. Within this growing field of molecular biology, experiments on the epigenetic effects of ‘maternal care’ on offspring health have received much scientific and public attention and are often called upon to showcase how environmental epigenetics will create a new understanding of life as inherently ‘biosocial.’ While, on the one hand, this research is exciting and offers possible opportunities for collaboration between molecular biology and the social sciences, it is also necessary to consider its political dimensions. In this paper, we show how commonsense assumptions about sex, gender, sexuality, and class are present in the design, interpretation, and dissemination of experiments on the epigenetic effects of maternal care. As these experiments come to support claims about human motherhood through a dense speculative cross-traffic between epigenetic studies in rodents and psychological and epidemiological studies in humans, current research trends work to illustrate rather than interrogate existing stereotypes about maternal agency and responsibility. With this analysis, we offer a cautionary perspective regarding the potentials and challenges for new forms of collaborative biosocial knowledge practices emerging out of environmental epigenetics.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Ludwik Fleck, a Polish molecular biologist and early theorist of science, developed the notion of “pre-ideas” (1935) to account for how scientific processes often depart from pre-set beliefs about the matter they investigate. These include taken for granted assumptions that build on folk knowledge, findings in other scientific fields and earlier, possibly outdated work in one’s own field. In his own work, Fleck uses the example of syphilis to show how the pre-modern folk idea of bad blood crucially shaped how syphilis was investigated. This idea of ‘bad blood’ was both inaccurate and generative of important research. Fleck understands pre-ideas as inherently necessary for knowledge production as they allow for hypotheses to emerge, yet he also points out that they are prone to reflect societal bias and often are hard to overcome, even if empirical evidence to the contrary accumulates. He argues that a sustained reflection of pre-ideas and their historical and social situatedness is hence crucial. He writes: “Whether we like it or not, we can never sever our links with the past, complete with all its errors. It survives in accepted concepts, in the presentation of problems, in the syllabus of formal education, in everyday life, as well as in language and institutions. Concepts are not spontaneously created but are determined by their ‘ancestors.’ That which has occurred in the past is a greater cause of insecurity—rather, it only becomes a cause of insecurity—when our ties with it remain unconscious and unknown” (1935, p. 20).
As is the case for many other STS scholars, both authors regularly teach classes for students in natural sciences, social sciences and humanities that explores the social, ethical, and political aspects of life science research. For example, Martha Kenney teaches a class called “Genetics, Biotechnology, and the Politics of Difference” that regularly enrolls undergraduate and graduate students in Women and Gender Studies, Biology, and American Indian Studies. Such classes require introductory texts that teach ‘critical scientific literacy’ to students with a wide range of backgrounds and expertise.
Despite the changing politics of gender in the 20th century, Neo-Darwinian accounts of animal behaviors and morphology still rely on these Darwinian gender roles, especially in the sexual selection literature (see Roughgarden, 2004, 2009). For example, evolutionary biologists hypothesize that large human brains are ‘male ornament’ (like the peacock’s feathers) used to compete with other men to attract mates, whereas women developed large brains so that they could appreciate the large brains of men and choose the best specimen (e.g., Rice, 2007).
Feminist science studies scholars with graduate degrees in the natural sciences include Karen Barad (physics), Anne Fausto-Sterling (developmental genetics), Donna Haraway (biology), Ruth Hubbard (biology), Evelyn Fox Keller (physics), Lilly Irani (computer science), Natasha Myers (environmental science), Deboleena Roy (neuroscience), Astrid Schrader (physics), Banu Subramanian (zoology genetics), and Ruth Müller (molecular biology).
Beyond the question of whether love is quantifiable is the basic question of whether the human category ‘motherly love’ can apply to the licking and grooming behavior of rats, since human mothers tend not to lick their young. Although it is easy to imagine human analogues (cuddling, breastfeeding, etc.), we argue that these parallels should be investigated rather than assumed.
Narratives about pathological motherhood are not just about class, but are racialized as well. In the U.S. context, The Moynihan Report (1965) declared that unwed black mothers damaged their families by “demoraliz[ing] black men” and “transmitt[ing] a pathological lifestyle to their children, perpetuating poverty and anti-social behavior from one generation to the next” (Roberts, 1997, p. 16; see also Collins, 1999, p. 69–96). Although the epigenetics literature refigures this transmission as biosocial rather than just social, it requires special care to avoid these racialized archetypes in telling scientific stories about pathological inheritance.
LG-ABN = Licking, Grooming, Arch-Back-Nursing.
The relationship between the environment and the genome is often expressed using the metaphor of ‘epigenetic programming’ (Landecker, 2011), which, like many dominant biological discourses of the 20th century, renders life as information (Fox Keller, 1995). As in the genomic era, these metaphors can lead to modes of deterministic thinking. Rather than genetic determinism the metaphor of ‘epigenetic programming’ leads to a new form of “environmental determinism” (Müller, forthcoming) where the psychological and physiological make-up of an organism is defined by its environment.
Our best guess is that they had intended to cite Belsky et al (2007) “Family rearing antecedents to pupertal timing,” although this does not appear anywhere in their works cited. However, without the correct reference it is difficult to assess the epistemological strength of the parallels between the human study and the rat experiments.
During final revisions for this article, the DOHaD Society homepage has undergone a relaunch. The archived link can be found here: http://web.archive.org/web/20150802235357/http://www.mrc-leu.soton.ac.uk/dohad/index.asp.
In the Nature News article (Reardon, 2015), the study about poverty and brain size that appears in Nature Neuroscience is joined by ‘unpublished research’ from another lab in order to strengthen the explanatory claims of the researchers. Thus, a peer-reviewed study, unpublished data, and a speculation about epigenetic causes are all called upon to support a specific biosocial explanation. This kind of reporting contributes to cycles of hype where poorly substantiated claims are repeated without critical scientific or social scientific analysis.
This happens at a historical moment in which actual class mobility is found to be on the decline in many Western countries for the first time in generations (Altzinger et al, 2013; Bukodi et al, 2015). This phenomenon is particularly pronounced for people of color, ethnic minorities, and 2nd- and 3rd-generation immigrant groups.
This figuration is familiar from such ‘fish out of water’ narratives as Mark Twain’s The Prince and the Pauper (1881) or Will Smith’s The Fresh Prince of Bel Air (1990-1996). These epigenetic narratives take what is usually coded as cultural difference, and render it as biological.
Women of color feminists have been especially important critics of public health interventions that focus on mothers and ‘pathological’ family formations. Angela Davis, for example, writes: “While the difficulties besetting the family should by no means be dismissed, any strategies intended to alleviate the prevailing problems among poor Black people that methodologically target the family for change and leave the socioeconomic conditions perpetuating Black unemployment and poverty intact are doomed to failure at the outset” (1990, p. 81).
Altzinger, W., Lamei, N., Rumplmaier, B., and Schneebaum, A. (2013) Intergenerationelle soziale Mobilität in Österreich. Statistische Nachrichten 68(1): 48–62.
Balmer, A.S. et al (2015) Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations: Reflections on working in Post-ELSI Spaces in the UK Synthetic Biology Community. Science & Technology Studies 28(3): 3–25.
Belsky, J. et al (2007) Family rearing antecedents of pubertal timing. Child Development 78(4): 1302–1321.
Boero, N. (2009) Fat kids, working moms, and the “epidemic of obesity”: Race, class, and mother-blame. In: E. Rothblum and S. Solovay (eds.) The Fat Studies Reader. New York: New York University Press, pp. 113–120.
Buchen, L. (2010) Neuroscience: In their Nurture. Nature 467(7312): 146–148.
Buffone, S. (2012) Towards an integrative theory of crime and delinquency: Re-conceptualizing the Farrington theory. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory 5(2): 895–911.
Bukodi, E., Goldthorpe, J.H., Waller, L., and Kuha, J. (2015) The mobility problem in Britain: New findings from the analysis of birth cohort data. The British Journal of Sociology 66(1): 93–117.
Bullard, R.D. (2011) Confronting environmental racism in the 21st century. In: A.H. Deming and L.E. Savoy (eds.) The Colors of Nature: Culture, Identity, and the Natural World. Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed Editions.
Caldji, C., Diorio, J., and Meaney, M.J. (2000) Variations in maternal care in infancy regulate the development of stress reactivity. Biological Psychiatry 48(12): 1164–1174.
Cameron, N.M., Champagne, F.A., Parent, C., Fish, E.W., Ozaki-Kuroda, K., and Meaney, M.J. (2005) The programming of individual differences in defensive responses and reproductive strategies in the rat through variations in maternal care. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 29(4–5): 843–865.
Cameron, N.M., Shahrokh, D., Del Corpo, A., Dhir, S.K., Szyf, M., Champagne, F.A., and Meaney, M.J. (2008) Epigenetic programming of phenotypic variations in reproductive strategies in the rat through maternal care. J Neuroendocrinol 20(6): 795–801.
Champagne, F.A., Francis, D.D., Mar, A., and Meaney, M.J. (2003) Variations in maternal care in the rat as a mediating influence for the effects of environment on development. Physiology & Behavior 79(3): 359–371.
Champagne, F.A. and Meaney, M.J. (2006) Stress during gestation alters postpartum maternal care and the development of the offspring in a rodent model. Biological Psychiatry 59(12): 1227–1235.
Collins, P.H. (1999) Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
Darling, K.W., Ackerman, S.L., Hiatt, R.H., Lee, S.S.-J., and Shim, J.K. (2016) Enacting the molecular imperative: How gene-environment interaction research links bodies and environments in the post-genomic age. Social Science & Medicine 155: 51–60.
Davis, A.Y. (1990) Women, Culture & Politics. New York: Vintage Books.
Farrington, D.P., Gallagher, B., Morley, L., St Ledger, R.J., and West, D.J. (1988) Are there any successful men from criminogenic backgrounds? Psychiatry 51(2): 116–130.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000) Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books.
Fine, C. (2010) Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Fitzgerald, D. and Callard, F. (2015) Social science and neuroscience beyond interdisciplinarity: Experimental entanglements. Theory, Culture & Society 32(1): 3–32.
Fitzgerald, D., Rose, N., and Singh, I. (2014) Urban life and mental health: Re-visiting politics, society and biology. Discover Society, 13 January 2016, 2014.
Fleck, L. (1979 (1935)) Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
Fox Keller, E. (1983) A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Fox Keller, E. (1995) Refiguring Life: Metaphors of Twentieth Century Biology. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gluckman, P.D., Hanson, M.A., Buklijas, T., Low, F.M., and Beedle, A.S. (2009) Epigenetic mechanisms that underpin metabolic and cardiovascular diseases. Nature Reviews Endocrinology 5(7): 401–408.
Haapasalo, J. and Tremblay, R.E. (1994) Physically aggressive boys from ages 6 to 12: Family background, parenting behavior, and prediction of delinquency. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 62(5): 1044–1052.
Haraway, D.J. (1988) Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3): 575–599.
Haraway, D.J. (1989) Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science. New York: Routledge.
Haraway, D.J. (1997) Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan_Meets_Oncomouse: Feminism and Technoscience. New York: Routledge.
Hedlund, M. (2012) Epigenetic responsibility. Medicine Studies 3(3): 171–183.
Hubbard, R. (1979) Have only men evolved? In: B. Fried, R. Hubbard, and M.S. Henifin (eds.) Women Look at Biology Looking at Women. Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing Co.
Kuzawa, C.W. and Sweet, E. (2009) Epigenetics and the embodiment of race: Developmental origins of US racial disparities in cardiovascular health. American Journal of Human Biology 21(1): 2–15.
Landecker, H. (2011) Food as exposure: Nutritional epigenetics and the new metabolism. BioSocieties 6(2): 167–194.
Landecker, H. and Panofsky, A. (2013) From social structure to gene regulation, and back: A critical introduction to environmental epigenetics for sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 39(1): 333–357.
Loi, M., Del Savio, L., and Stupka, E. (2013) Social epigenetics and equality of opportunity. Public Health Ethics 6(2): 142–153.
Maher, J., Fraser, S., and Wright, J. (2010) Framing the mother: Childhood obesity, maternal responsibility and care. Journal of Gender Studies 19(3): 233–247.
Mansfield, B. (2012) Race and the new epigenetic biopolitics of environmental health. BioSocieties 7(4): 352–372.
McGowan, P.O. and Szyf, M. (2010) The epigenetics of social adversity in early life: Implications for mental health outcomes. Neurobiology of Disease 39(1): 66–72.
Meaney, M.J. (2001) Maternal care, gene expression, and the transmission of individual differences in stress reactivity across generations. Annual Review of Neuroscience 24(1): 1161–1192.
Meaney, M.J. (2004) The nature of nurture: Maternal effects and chromatin remodeling. In: J.T. Cacioppo and G.G. Berntson (eds.) Essays in Social Neuroscience: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 1–14.
Meaney, M.J. (2010) Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene × environment interactions. Child Development 81(1): 41–79.
Meaney, M.J., Liebowitz, M.L., and David Leonardo, E. (2015) Neurobiology of Anxiety Disorders. In: A. Tasman, J. Kay, J.A. Lieberman, M.B. First, and M. Riba (eds.) Psychiatry, 4th ed. West Sussex: Wiley, pp. 320–340.
Meaney, M.J., Szyf, M., and Seckl, J.R. (2007) Epigenetic mechanisms of perinatal programming of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function and health. Trends in Molecular Medicine 13(7): 269–277.
Meloni, M. (2013) Biology without biologism: Social theory in a postgenomic age. Sociology 48(4): 731–746.
Meloni, M. (2015) Epigenetics for the social sciences: justice, embodiment, and inheritance in the postgenomic age. New Genetics and Society 34(2): 125–151.
Meloni, M. and Testa, G. (2014) Scrutinizing the epigenetics revolution. BioSocieties 9(4): 431–456.
Moynihan, D.P. (1965) The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Washington, D.C.: Office of policy planning and research. United States department of labor.
Müller, R. (2014) Racing for what? Anticipation and acceleration in the work and career practices of academic life science postdocs. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 15(3): http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1403150.
Müller, R. (forthcoming) Biological determinism in the age of epigenetics: From genetic to environmental. Manuscript in preparation.
Nguyen, H.B., Bagot, R.C., Diorio, J., Wong, T.P., and Meaney, M.J. (2015) Maternal care differentially affects neuronal excitability and synaptic plasticity in the dorsal and ventral hippocampus. Neuropsychopharmacology 40(7): 1590–1599.
Niewöhner, J. (2011) Epigenetics: Embedded bodies and the molecularisation of biography and milieu. BioSocieties 6(3): 279–298.
Niewöhner, J. (2015) Epigenetics: Localizing biology through co-laboration. New Genetics and Society 34(2): 219–242.
Oudshoorn, N. (1994) Beyond the Natural Body: An Archaeology of Sex Hormones. London: Routledge.
Pickersgill, M. (2014) Neuroscience, epigenetics and the intergenerational transmission of social life: Exploring expectations and engagements. Families, Relationships and Societies 3(3): 481–484.
Pickersgill, M. (2016) Epistemic modesty, ostentatiousness and the uncertainties of epigenetics: On the knowledge machinery of (social) science. The Sociological Review Monographs 64: 186–202.
Pickersgill, M., Niewohner, J., Muller, R., Martin, P., and Cunningham-Burley, S. (2013) Mapping the new molecular landscape: Social dimensions of epigenetics. New Genetics and Society 32(4): 429–447.
Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2011) Matters of care in technoscience: Assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science 41(1): 85–106.
Reardon, J., Metcalf, J., Kenney, M., and Barad, K. (2015) Science and justice: The trouble and the promise. Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience 1(1): http://catalystjournal.org/ojs/index.php/catalyst/article/view/reardon_metcalf_kenney_barad.
Reardon, S. (2015) Poverty shrinks brains from birth. Nature News, 30 March, 2015; doi: 10.1038/nature.2015.17227.
Rice, S. (2007) The Encyclopedia of Evolution. New York: Facts On File.
Richardson, S.S. (2013) Sex Itself: The Search for Male and Female in the Human Genome. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Richardson, S.S. (2015) Maternal bodies in the postgenomic order: Gender and the explanatory landscape of epigenetics. In: S.S. Richardson and H. Stevens (eds.) Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome. Durham: Duke University Press.
Richardson, S.S., Daniels, C.R., Gillman, M.W., Golden, J., Kukla, R., Kuzawa, C., and Rich-Edwards, J. (2014) Don’t blame the mothers. Nature 512: 131–132.
Roberts, D.E. (1997) Killing The Black Body: Race, Reproduction, And The Meaning Of Liberty. New York: Pantheon Books.
Rose, N. (2013) The human sciences in a biological age. Theory, Culture & Society 30(1): 3–34.
Rose, S. (2009) Darwin 200: Should scientists study race and IQ? NO: Science and society do not benefit. Nature 457(7231): 786–788.
Roughgarden, J. (2004) Evolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Roughgarden, J. (2009) The Genial Gene: Deconstructing Darwinian Selfishness. Berkeley: The University of California Press.
Schiebinger, L. (1993) Nature’s Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science. Boston: Beacon Press.
Singh, I. (2012) Human development, nature and nurture: Working beyond the divide. BioSocieties 7(3): 308–321.
Spade, D. (2011) Laws as tactics. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 21(2): 40–71.
Stern, A. (2005) Eugenic Nation: Faults and Frontiers of Better Breeding in Modern America, 2nd ed. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
Stotz, K. and Griffiths, P.E. (2008) Biohumanities: Rethinking the relationship between biosciences, philosophy and history of science, and society. The Quarterly Review of Biology 83(1): 37–45.
Szyf, M., Weaver, I.C.G., Champagne, F.A., Diorio, J., and Meaney, M.J. (2005) Maternal programming of steroid receptor expression and phenotype through DNA methylation in the rat. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 26(3–4): 139–162.
Vicedo, M. (2013) The Nature and Nurture of Love: From Imprinting to Attachment in Cold War America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Viseu, A. (2015) Caring for nanotechnology? Being an integrated social scientist. Social Studies of Science 45(5): 642–664.
Weaver, I.C.G. et al (2004) Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior. Nature Neuroscience 7(8): 847–854.
Wells, J.C. (2010) Maternal capital and the metabolic ghetto: An evolutionary perspective on the transgenerational basis of health inequalities. American Journal of Human Biology 22(1): 1–17.
Zhang, T.-Y. et al (2006) Maternal programming of defensive responses through sustained effects on gene expression. Biological Psychology 73(1): 72–89.
Zhang, T.-Y., Parent, C., Weaver, I.A.N., and Meaney, M.J. (2004) Maternal programming of individual differences in defensive responses in the rat. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1032(1): 85–103.
A first version of this paper was presented at the workshop “Epigenetics, Society & Gender” at the University of Vienna, June 22, 2012, organized by Sigrid Schmitz, Ruth Müller and Renee Schröder. We gratefully acknowledge the travel support for Martha Kenney that allowed us to start this project, and the inspiring discussions at the workshop. We would further like to thank the two anonymous reviewers and the editors for their constructive comments that helped improve the article, as well as Martyn Pickersgill and Cornelia Schadler for their valuable feedback during the writing process.
About this article
Cite this article
Kenney, M., Müller, R. Of rats and women: Narratives of motherhood in environmental epigenetics. BioSocieties 12, 23–46 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-016-0002-7
- biosocial science
- feminist science & technology studies