Long Beach State University Social Science Paper

Winter 2022
Mon / Wed 10:00am – 11:20am
All classes will be held synchronously on Zoom
Click here for the classroom Zoom link
University of California Irvine
Department of Anthropology
Anthro 128A: Science, Technology, and Controversy
Lecturer: Dr. Taylor Riley (she/her)
Email: [email protected]
Student support hours (virtual):
Mon / Wed 2:30pm – 3:30pm on Zoom
Student support hours Zoom link
*Please note that this class has not been allocated a TA and therefore we will not have
Discussion sections. We will discuss all course materials and content in Lecture.
Course description
This course serves as an exploration of science and technology studies and delves into key
scientific developments and controversies from an anthropological perspective. It will begin with
an examination of the boundaries of science and the politics of medical knowledge and discovery.
In addition to looking at theoretical perspectives on science and technology, broadly conceived,
the course will introduce several controversial case studies from different historical and
geopolitical contexts. We will read about and discuss critical approaches to scientific
experimentation, health economics, technological advancements, law and society, and the
pharmaceutical industry. Students will be asked to consider the lessons these case studies provide
for combatting inequities in our world today.
The following key questions will be of particular relevance to discussions and exercises: What is
science and technology studies and how is science cultural? How are resources unevenly
distributed in the global landscapes of health and care? Where is the line between necessary and
dangerous technologies? What role does the pharmaceutical industry play in health justice and
injustice? And finally: how can anthropology and ethnography contribute to more responsible
scientific inquiry and technological innovation?
Important practical information
These are difficult times as we navigate online learning in an ongoing pandemic. I as your lecturer
am committed to being there for you and I understand that everyone’s situation is unique. The key
guiding principles for our time together will be empathy and mutual respect. If you have questions
or concerns, please ask. I want to see you meet these challenges and succeed.
Above images from left to right: Broadly image from a story on Project Prevention; Miss Evers’ Boys
by Curtis James; the ‘Harmony’ robot; Partners in Health at a clinic in Haiti; Oxycontin
This syllabus is your guide to the class, so please continue to reference it throughout the quarter
for information about assignments, readings, and lectures. All course details, readings, and slides
will be available on Canvas. Any notes that you take, the slides, and the readings are key resources
for completing your assignments. If you miss sessions or add the class late, please do the missed
readings, review the missed lecture slides and recordings, and keep up with assignments.
Readings:
All readings are provided on Canvas. There is no official textbook for the class. Instead, we will
be reading a series of journal articles, book chapters, and news/web articles. You are required to
complete readings before the first lecture where a text is indicated. Part of your participation grade
includes summarizing readings when prompted, which will often but not always be the start of
class. You do not need to do this for every session, but providing several commentaries on readings
is a good way to ensure you receive a high participation grade (see ‘Grading’ for more info).
Attendance and lateness:
This is a synchronous class and it is important that you attend on Zoom. Attendance will be taken
as part of your grade and your comprehension of the readings and lectures should be reflected in
your assignments. Punctuality is important. Please allow yourself plenty of time to get to class.
If you miss more than two lectures, you must generally provide a brief explanation via e-mail
before the start of your third missed class so you don’t lose points. However, if you are having
difficulties with attendance, please contact me to discuss.
Zoom and class rules of engagement:
You must be present on Zoom. This includes having your camera on when you can, paying
attention to the lecture, and participating in in-class discussions and Q&As. Please show respect
for the course and do not leave the Zoom session early or do other things while class is in session.
Healthy debate is encouraged and you are expected to make comments and ask questions about
course readings and content during discussions in lecture. You are encouraged to share your
thoughts and feelings. Keep in mind that our classroom is a safe space, so combative dialogue and
hate speech will not be tolerated.
Late submissions:
Late submissions (after 11:59pm on the due date) will be marked down by 5% per day.
Assignments will generally not be accepted more than one week late. If you are having trouble
with a deadline due to illness or hardship, please contact me before the due date.
Plagiarism:
All assignments will be checked for plagiarism with Turnitin software. You must follow the
guidelines posted on Canvas and cite appropriately. Plagiarism is not acceptable and will be dealt
with accordingly. This includes absent citations, work which matches that of a classmate, copying
from lecture slides, and re-using content from other papers or assignments you have written.
Note on citing course readings:
Please note that the list of required readings in the schedule in this syllabus and the recommended
readings which follow show authors, titles, and the sources where the material can be found, but
these are not full citations. You will need to look up the readings online to find their full citational
information (page numbers, publication info, etc). For information on how to cite these works in
your assignments, please see the guidelines on Canvas.
Overall accessibility and access to lectures and course content:
The lecture slides and available recordings are posted on Canvas. Lectures on Zoom are recorded
in accordance with privacy regulations and are only accessible to enrolled students and instructors.
UCI and Zoom have FERPA-compliant agreements in place to protect the security and privacy of
UCI Zoom accounts. Students who do not wish to be recorded have the option to alter their name
on Zoom and to not share their computer audio or video during Zoom sessions.
If you have accessibility needs and concerns about these being met in our online class, please
contact your lecturer for assistance, or reach out to the Disability Services Center if you require a
letter of accommodation. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to get in touch. This
includes if you are having any difficulties with the course content or are experiencing issues that
affect your participation or ability to be physically or mentally present. I will respond to you in a
timely manner, but please note I may not respond on evenings or weekends.
Learning goals, objectives, and outcomes
Goals
➢ Students will be versed in advanced critical thinking and analytical writing
➢ Students will grasp and embrace the interdisciplinarity of science and technology studies
➢ Students will weigh arguments against counterarguments and craft their own sufficiently
nuanced lines of argumentation
➢ Students will apply theoretical and historical knowledge to the real world in the
contemporary
Objectives
➢ Students will hone understandings of science, technology, and controversy crossculturally
➢ Students will understand some biases that impact scientific knowledge-making and
technological innovation across cultures
➢ Students will critically consider the ethics of scientific and technological advancement
➢ Students will gain an understanding of contemporary issues around medical and scientific
experimentation, policies affecting human lives and health outcomes, and new
technologies in a digital yet unequal age
Outcomes
Learning outcomes
➢ Students confidently identify nuances of science, technology, and power
➢ Students effectively engage with material in lecture through questions and comments
➢ Students apply what they learn in the course to their personal and academic observations
and experiences for discussion with classmates
Assessment outcomes
➢ Students read complex texts closely and analyze them critically
✓ Assessed through a Critical Reading Assignment
➢ Students write an original text on class themes relying on analysis of literature and events
✓ Assessed through the Conference Paper and related assignments
➢ Students digest and elaborate on course content and discuss key topics as a group
✓ Assessed through the Participation grade and Presentation
Grading
Participation – 10%: You are required to attend lecture according to the policy outlined, be
present on Zoom, and participate in an active and meaningful way as part of your grade.
Participation includes commenting on and engaging with the readings and discussions. Note if you
are having trouble with attendance or participation, you should reach out to me to discuss.
10 points total
Critical Reading Assignment – 25%: A 1,000-word (+/- 10%) assignment which asks you to
respond to one of three prompts, each addressing two out of the first six readings from the course.
See the guidelines provided on Canvas for details. Submit to Canvas under Assignments as a .doc,
.docx, or .pdf only. Due before 11:59pm on 1/30.
25 points total
Conference Paper Abstract and Annotated Bibliography – 20%: Create a 300-word (+/- 10%)
abstract for paper on a specific, controversial issue of your choice that deals with science and/or
technology today, followed by an annotated bibliography of five sources that inform your project.
You must choose a different topic and use different sources from your Critical Reading
Assignment. Please see the separate guide on Canvas for details. Due before 11:59pm on 2/13.
20 points total
Conference Paper – 30%: Write a 2,000-word (+/- 10%) research paper on the topic you chose,
including an original title and a thesis statement. Please see the separate guide on Canvas for
details. As with all assignments, submit to Canvas as a .doc, .docx, or .pdf only. Due before
11:59pm on 2/27.
30 points total
Virtual Conference Presentation – 15%: Give a short, informal oral presentation summarizing
your paper and briefly discussing further reflections on this experience of researching and writing
about the topic you chose. Unlike other sessions, the presentations will not be recorded. There
generally won’t be make-ups for the presentation, but please contact me to discuss any issues. To
be delivered in class on Zoom during our meetings on 3/3 and 3/7.
15 points total
Numerical grading scale
A+ = 96.5–100
A = 93.5–96.49
A- = 90.0–93.49
B+ = 86.5–89.99
B = 83.5–86.49
B- = 80.0–83.49
C+ = 76.5–79.99
C = 73.5–76.49
C- = 70.0–73.49
D+ = 66.5–69.99
D = 63.5–66.49
D- = 60.0–63.49
F = 0–59.99
Grading rubrics
Critical Reading Assignment:
The categories below outline the expectations of papers within the specified grade ranges. Your
adherence to the guidelines set out for the assignments (provided on Canvas) will also be
factored into your grade. You may lose points for issues with citations, length, and scope.
24.5–25 points (A+): An excellent assignment which is clear and insightful, showing a deep
understanding of the key readings at hand, the prompt, and overall themes explored, with no
noticeable or significant explanatory issues.
22.5–24 points (A- to A): A very good assignment which demonstrates a solid understanding of
the key readings. The text likely should have gone a little further analytically, or it contains a minor
issue which does not detract from the writing overall.
20–22 points (B- to B+): A good assignment which shows an understanding of the prompt, the key
readings, and the concepts written about. This analysis may be a bit vague or overly-general at
times or contain minor explanatory or factual errors.
17.5–19.5 points (C- to C+): A satisfactory assignment which reflects a general understanding but
does not quite show a true grasp of either the key readings or the prompt. The analysis provided
likely contains more than one explanatory errors or other issues.
15–17 points (D- to D+): An assignment which partly or mostly addresses the prompt but lacks
clarity and/or relies on illogical arguments or opinion. It is either entirely vague/general or contains
several explanatory/factual errors.
12.5–14.5 points (F): A failing assignment. It is either complete but does not address the prompt
at hand, attempts to address it but completely misses the mark, or is clearly incomplete.
0: An assignment which is not handed in or is plagiarized.
Conference Paper Outline and Annotated Bibliography:
Outline content: 5 points (points given for providing a clear overview of an issue and setting the
stage for the project)
Source descriptions: 3 points each (points given for following the guidelines in terms of source
specifications, description length, and assessment of sources)
Feedback example:
Grade: 18.25/20 (A-)
Outline – 4.5/5: Solid work, project topic is clear and paper structure is laid out well. Third
sentence could use more clarity. Overview is a bit too broad at times, but good job overall.
Source 1 – 3/3: Excellent work.
Source 2 – 3/3: Great.
Source 3 – 2.75/3: Good, though technically too short.
Source 4 – 2.25/3: Decent summary, plans for utilization are too vague.
Source 5 – 2.75/3: Very good, but should have put the full citation here.
Conference Paper:
The categories below outline the expectations of papers within the specified grade ranges. Your
adherence to the guidelines set out for the assignments (provided on Canvas) will also be
factored into your grade. You may lose points for issues with citations, length, and scope.
29–30 points (A+): An excellent, original paper which is clear and insightful, showing a deep
understanding of the prompt, topic chosen, and evidence introduced, with very few if any
noticeable issues.
27–28.5 points (A- to A): A very good paper which demonstrates an understanding of an original
topic choice and evidence introduced to discuss it. This response likely needed to go just a little
further to demonstrate its points, or contains a minor factual error or two, or lapse in clarity.
24–26.5 points (B- to B+): An above-average paper which shows an understanding of the
assignment, chosen topic, and the concepts written about and has significant potential. This
response may lack the nuance required of an A-level response and likely contains a few minor
factual errors or unclear statements.
21–23.5 points (C- to C+): A satisfactory paper which reflects a general understanding of its
themes and evidence but does not quite show a true grasp of the concepts at hand. This response
may contain two or more explanatory errors, and/or has some strong analytical moments
accompanied by unclear tangents.
18–20.5 points (D- to D+): A paper which partly or mostly addresses the chosen topic and meets
the assignment requirement, but lacks clarity and/or relies on illogical arguments or opinion. It is
either entirely vague or contains several explanatory errors which affect readability.
15–17.5 points (F): A failing paper. This research and/or writing is extremely minimal, does not
address the topic at hand whatsoever, or attempts to address it but completely misses the mark.
0: Not submitted or plagiarized.
Virtual Conference Presentation:
There is no specific rubric for the presentation. All live presentations given on the day they are
scheduled will receive a passing grade. To receive full points, presentations should discuss the
written paper within the timeframe specified.
Schedule of topics and required readings
Date
W1
Mon
Lecture Theme
Required Reading Due
Topic 1: Studying Science and Technology
No reading due
Review Syllabus / course materials after class
1/3
Class introduction / Syllabus
W1
Wed
Introduction to STS and
controversy
Foucault, Michel (1978a). “We ‘Other
Victorians’,” in The History of Sexuality Volume
I: An Introduction.
Institutional biopower
Jasso-Aguilar, Rebeca and Howard Waitzkin
(2011). “Multinational corporations, the state, and
contemporary medicine.” Health Sociology
Review 20:3.
Diagnoses, culture, and
controversy
Kaler, Sandra R. and Freeman, B. J. (1994).
“Analysis of Environmental Deprivation:
Cognitive and Social Development in Romanian
Orphans.” Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry 35:4.
1/5
W2
Mon
1/10
W2
Wed
1/12
W3
Mon
NO CLASS: Holiday
1/17
W3
Wed
1/19
W4
Mon
Transplants, implants, and
prostheses
Illness and global health politics
Farmer, Paul (2003a). “Cruel and Unusual: DrugResistant Tuberculosis as Punishment,”
Pathologies of Power: Health, Human Rights,
and the New War on the Poor.
An intersectional approach to
HIV/AIDS
Farmer, Paul (2003b). “Pestilence and Restraint:
Guantanamo, AIDS, and the Logic of
Quarantine.” Pathologies of Power: Health,
Human Rights, and the New War on the Poor.
1/24
W4
Wed
1/26
Sun
1/30
Sobchack, Vivian (2006). “A Leg to Stand on:
Prosthetics, Metaphor, and Materiality,” in The
Prosthetic Impulse: From a Posthuman Present
to a Biocultural Future.
Critical Reading Assignment due by 11:59pm
Topic 2: Case Studies and Contemporary Controversies
W5
Mon
1/31
Opioids, addiction, and the
pharmaceutical industry
Nissen, Nicholas (2021). “Dying of loneliness:
What COVID-19 has taught us about the opioid
epidemic.” ABC News.
W5
Wed
Tuskegee, unethical
experimentation, and vaccines
Brandt, Allan M. (1978). “Racism and Research:
The Case of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study.” The
Hastings Center Report 8:6.
2/2
W6
Mon
2/7
W6
Wed
Forced sterilization yesterday and
today
ARTs and surrogacy markets
2/9
Sun
2/13
W7
Mon
Stern, Alexandra M, Nicole L. Novak, Natalie
Lira, Kate O’Connor, et al. (2016). “California’s
Sterilization Survivors: An Estimate and Call for
Redress.” AJPH 107:1.
Pande, Amrita (2011). “Transnational
commercial surrogacy in India: Gifts for global
sisters?” Reproductive Biomedicine Online 23.
Conference Paper Abstract and Annotated Bibliography due by 11:59pm
Contraception and abortion
2/14
Haddad, Lisa B. and Nawal M. Nour (2009).
“Unsafe Abortion: Unnecessary Maternal
Mortality.” Reviews in Obstetrics and
Gynecology 2:2.
Topic 3: Science, Technology, and the Future
W7
Wed
2/16
W8
Mon
Artificial wombs and AI robots
Kubes, Tanja (2019). “New Materialist
Perspectives on Sex Robots: A Feminist
Dystopia/Utopia?” SocSci 8:8.
NO CLASS: Holiday
2/21
W8
Wed
Assisted death and eternal life
2/23
Sun
2/27
W9
Mon
2/28
W9
Wed
3/2
W10
Mon
3/7
W10
Wed
3/9
Brody, Howard (1992). “Assisted Death: A
Compassionate Response to a Medical Failure.”
New England Journal of Medicine 327:19.
Conference Paper due by 11:59pm
Self-service technologies, social
media, and AI
Science, Technology, and
Controversy Virtual Conference
Day 1
Science, Technology, and
Controversy Virtual Conference
Day 2
Conference wrap-up /
Future directions
Cavanagh, Thomas B. (2008). “Prosthetic gods:
The posthuman threat of self-service technology.”
Interaction Studies 9:3.
No reading due / Presentations
No reading due / Presentations
Debold, Elizabeth (2015). “Conchita Wurst,
Cyborgs, and Our Postgender Future.”
ElizabethDebold.com
Please note again that the list of readings above and below are not full citations. With most citation
styles, you will need to look up and add some detail to these, such as potential links, page numbers,
publication locations, etc.
Recommended readings
W1: Foucault, Michel (1978b). “Right of Death and Power over Life,” in The History of Sexuality
Volume I: An Introduction.
Pylypa, Jen (1998). “Power and Bodily Practice: Applying the Work of Foucault to an
Anthropology of the Body.” Arizona Anthropologist: 13.
W2: Treichler, Paula A. (1987). “AIDS, Homophobia, and Biomedical Discourse: An Epidemic of
Signification.” AIDS: Cultural Analysis/Cultural Activism 43.
W3: Oudshoorn, Nelly (2015). “Sustaining cyborgs: Sensing and tuning agencies of pacemakers and
implantable cardioverter defibrillators.” Social Studies of Science 45:1.
W4: Farmer, Paul (2003). “Rethinking health and human rights: Time for a paradigm shift,” in
Pathologies of Power: Health, Human Rights, and the New War on the Poor.
W5: Jung, Yoohyun (2021). “We have life-saving treatments for the opioid overdose epidemic.
Here’s why they often don’t get used.” San Francisco Chronicle.
Singh Bajaj, Simar and Fatima Cody Stanford (2021). “Beyond Tuskegee: Vaccine Distrust and
Everyday Racism.” NEJM.org
W6: Pearl, Mike (2014). “An Interview with the Woman Who Pays Drug Addicts to Get Sterilized.”
Vice.com.
Goodrow, Gabrielle (2019). “Biopower, Disability and Capitalism: Neoliberal Eugenics and the
Future of ART Regulation.” Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy 26.
W7: Kumar, Anuradha, Leila Hessinia, and Ellen M.H. Mitchell (2009). “Conceptualising Abortion
Stigma.” Culture, Health & Society 11:6.
Sedgwick, Helen (2017). “Artificial wombs could soon be a reality. What will this mean for
women?” The Guardian.
Riley, Taylor (2021). “Anthropology, Sex Robots, and Queer Posthumanisms.” AnthroDesires.
W8: Ganzini, Linda, Elizabeth R. Goy, and Steven K. Dobscha (2008). “Why Oregon Patients
Request Assisted Death: Family Members’ Views.” Journal of General Internal Medicine
Hackett, Robert (2014). “Highest-paid female executive seeks immortality – digitally.” Fortune.
W9: Carr, Caleb T. and Rebecca A. Hayes (2015). “Social Media: Defining, Developing, and
Divining.” Atlantic Journal of Communication 23:1
W10: Cuthbertson, Anthony (2019). “Donald Trump Faces Presidential Challenge from Transhumanist
Cyborg.” The Independent.
Conference Paper and Presentation guidelines
After completing your abstract and annotated bibliography due 2/13 (see separate guidelines
document for details), you will be completing a conference paper due on 2/27. You will also briefly
present on your paper in class on 3/2 or 3/7 (details below).
Paper guidelines:
Submit to Canvas under Assignments. Please submit in .doc/.docx, .rtf, or plain text format. Due
before 11:59pm on 2/27.
Your conference-style (research) paper should ideally be based on your submitted abstract and it
must elaborate on a specific, controversial issue of your choice that deals with science and/or
technology today. You must choose a different topic/theme and use mostly different sources from
your Critical Reading Assignment (one overlapping is okay as long as the content/writing is new).
Note that you can alter or change your previously indicated topic if necessary. If you change your
topic or choose to go in a different direction than your abstract indicated, please note this in your
submission (i.e. in the submission comment box on Canvas).
Consider an issue of ‘today’ as referring to something you could easily hear a news story about
this week. The issue could be one that has been around for e.g. 10+ years, but regardless of when
debates around it began, it needs to be clearly relevant in the contemporary.
The length requirement is 2,000 words +/-10%, not including works cited, footnotes, or titles. You
will lose partial points for writing less than 1,800 words or more than 2,200 words. You are
welcome to use quotes from relevant sources throughout the paper, but you should generally avoid
long block quotes of more than 75 words.
The paper must have an original title. Writing style and topic are up to you, as long as the guidelines
are followed. You are not expected to do any original research for the paper, though primary data
can be included (i.e. an informal interview you conducted or personal expertise, if you wish).
Remember the paper must not be an opinion piece or personal essay. You are welcome to use firstperson (‘I’ statements) if you like, but keep in mind that when you make a statement like “It is
clear that” or “I believe that,” always ask: have I backed this statement up with evidence?
Just as with the annotated bibliography, you should use at least one source from the course, but
only up to 3 of the 5 minimum required sources should come from the course. You will need to
find the rest through independent research. These do not necessarily need to be the same ones from
the annotated bibliography.
Please make sure at least 3 of your 5 sources are academic sources (books or journal articles). You
are welcome to also cite news/online articles, including but not limited to the ones we read in class,
but be careful in selecting these based on quality. Generally, avoid citing lectures/slides themselves
but feel free to cite quotes from other authors discussed in class.
In looking for sources, check out the recommended readings and links in the slides, as well as the
UCI library catalog (in addition to Google Books/Scholar). Adhere to all posted guidelines around
citations (and remember: never cite or plagiarize from Wikipedia – if you use Wikipedia for helpful
background info, check out the sources it cites and refer to those instead for more info).
The style of your citations is up to you (e.g. MLA, Chicago, Harvard), but they should be
consistent, and you should generally use page numbers (or ‘n.p.’ for no page) if you use direct
quotes within the text.
In the Works Cited, you should normally include the author(s), date, title, publication the text can
be found in (e.g. the name of a book the chapter is in, the name and issue of the journal an article
is in, the name and issue of the newspaper an article is in), the total pages of the cited text (if
applicable), and the publisher and location (if a book). Most styles require you to include a link
for web sources, if you use a news article or journal article that can be found online.
Citations:
Please use full citations like the examples below.
Example of an in-text citation:
Matzinger’s (1994) danger model of the immune system refutes “the belief that the immune
systems primary driving force is the need to discriminate between self and non-self” (p.
91).
Example of full citation of a journal article:
Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1989). “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black
Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist
Politics.”
University
of
Chicago
Legal
Forum
1:8.
139–167.
http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8
Example of full citation of a chapter in a book:
Heggie, Vanessa (2014). “Subjective Sex: Science, Medicine and Sex Tests in Sports.”
Routledge Handbook of Sport, Gender and Sexuality. Ed. Jennifer Hargreaves and Eric
Anderson. 339–347. London: Routledge.
Presentation guidelines:
You will have 5 minutes to present a brief overview of your paper in class on your assigned day
(3/2 or 3/7, to be determined during week 6-7). You won’t be able to use Powerpoint or other
screen-shared tools, but you are welcome to read off of notes.
Treat the presentation as if it were at an academic conference on science, technology, and
controversy, where you would have a limited amount of time to talk about a longer piece of
work.
You will have to unmute for the presentation, but video is not required. In accordance with
privacy regulations protecting students who do not wish to have their image or voice captured,
the presentation will not be recorded.
Think of the 5 minutes as an informal overview of the paper itself and what you discovered
while writing it: tell the class what your paper is about, the key argument(s) you made, why the
topic is important, and any lingering thoughts you have on the topic, including but not limited to
future directions in the field and related areas of unaddressed research.
The presentation is required, however you will only be graded on whether you met the above
requirements. All presentations given will receive a passing grade. Presentations not given will
receive a 0.
Paper rubric:
The categories below outline the expectations of papers within the specified grade ranges. Your
adherence to the guidelines set out for the assignments (provided on Canvas) will also be
factored into your grade. You may lose points for issues with citations, length, and scope.
29–30 points (A+): An excellent, original paper which is clear and insightful, showing a deep
understanding of the prompt, topic chosen, and evidence introduced, with very few if any
noticeable issues.
27–28.5 points (A- to A): A very good paper which demonstrates an understanding of an original
topic choice and evidence introduced to discuss it. This response likely needed to go just a little
further to demonstrate its points, or contains a minor factual error or two, or lapse in clarity.
24–26.5 points (B- to B+): An above-average paper which shows an understanding of the
assignment, chosen topic, and the concepts written about and has significant potential. This
response may lack the nuance required of an A-level response and likely contains a few minor
factual errors or unclear statements.
21–23.5 points (C- to C+): A satisfactory paper which reflects a general understanding of its
themes and evidence but does not quite show a true grasp of the concepts at hand. This response
may contain two or more explanatory errors, and/or has some strong analytical moments
accompanied by unclear tangents.
18–20.5 points (D- to D+): A paper which partly or mostly addresses the chosen topic and meets
the assignment requirement, but lacks clarity and/or relies on illogical arguments or opinion. It is
either entirely vague or contains several explanatory errors which affect readability.
15–17.5 points (F): A failing paper. This research and/or writing is extremely minimal, does not
address the topic at hand whatsoever, or attempts to address it but completely misses the mark.
0: Not submitted or plagiarized.
Daniela Amrhein
Dr. Taylor Riley
Anthro 128A
February 13, 2022
Title: HIV and AIDS in African Women and Insufficient Medication: An Intersectional
Approach
Abstract: In Africa, droughts have been common through the years with rains from March to
May only coming every two or three years. Another major issue in Africa presently, is their
economic status, most inhabitants are receiving very underwhelming incomes that are not
enough to support a strong, thriving family, or even themselves sometimes. To make up for low
income, some people, specifically women, turn to other methods in an attempt to make a living,
such methods can be dangerous for their health and others. This is all due to gender inequality,
droughts, and the economy which have brought many health problems to the continent, such as
famine, HIV and AIDS. African women make up the majority of those diagnosed with HIV
because there has not been much action to prevent and reduce these issues. Plans to reduce the
spread of HIV include solutions to gender inequality and poverty and improvements in the
biomedical field. Although there has not been many efforts to create medication for this area, due
to the fact that scientists do not want to create drug-resistant HIV, there is still hope that there is
some medication that will help those in desperate need. Considering their environment (economy
and weather), change must happen soon for those living in Africa or else, HIV levels will
continue to rise and there is a risk of cases spreading around the world. So far there are studies
that are looking at how many people have acquired resistance, because these people are more
susceptible to inherit drug resistant HIV. It is important to take an intersectional approach to this
issue because it is vital to understand that AIDS and HIV can occur to a diverse group of people
not just homosexuals.
Source 1: Ramjee, G., Daniels, B. Women and HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa. AIDS Res Ther 10,
30 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-6405-10-30
The authors discuss that women in sub-Saharan Africa make up the majority of the world’s HIV
infections. They argue that Africa is one of the most impacted areas for HIV, however women
have higher rates compared to their male counterparts. Many factors may contribute to the
increased levels, such as biological, socioeconomic, cultural and structural reasons. Fortunately,
in their study there have been increased HIV prevention strategies in the biomedical, structural,
and behavioral fields.
In discussing the intersectional approach to the argument, this source is useful because it
supports the argument that HIV and AIDS do not just affect those with a different sexual
orientiations, it unfortunately affects a variety of races and genders. It provides an interesting
point of view that it affects more women than men. The article also includes methods on how to
improve distribution of medication and other sorts of treatments, which will be incorporated into
the essay in ways to approach the major issue.
Source 2: Blower, Sallya; Bodine, Erina; Kahn, Jamesb; McFarland, Willic The antiretroviral
rollout and drug-resistant HIV in Africa: insights from empirical data and theoretical models,
AIDS: January 3, 2005 – Volume 19 – Issue 1 – p 1-14
In the article the authors were studying how an antiretroviral treatment (ART) affected the levels
of HIV in Africa. Over some period of time, they observed that after a while, HIV became
resistant and there was little to no effect from ART. The authors then provide other methods of
approach, such as, monitoring patients for acquired resistance, to drug resistant HIV, rather than
transmitted resistance.
This article is important because the totality of the paper is about treatments against HIV, and the
different methods scientists are attempting. When discussing the argument that there is
insufficient medication, this article will be good to discuss because it reveals how HIV is at risk
of becoming resistant to drugs and medications may not be possible. It is also important to note
that scientists are trying their best to reduce HIV, but there just is not enough data.
Source 3: Marshall Burke, Erick Gong, Kelly Jones, Income Shocks and HIV in Africa, The
Economic Journal, Volume 125, Issue 585, 1 June 2015, Pages 1157–1189,
https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12149
Burke, Gong, and Jones looked more closely at the economic conditions of Africa and how it
contributes to the high rates of AIDS and HIV by studying individuals across 19 countries. The
authors looked at rainfall and how that affects the epidemic, compared to each of the countries,
Africa showed significant droughts which contribute to the HIV increase. Also, income shocks
were also studied and explained about 20% of variation in HIV prevalence in Africa.
This will be an important contribution to my paper because it shows specifics on reasons as to
why HIV affects Africa more than other parts of the world. Income may be an obvious reason as
to why conditions are not ideal, however, the topic of weather being an issue brings up an
interesting point of view to discuss. This could also explain how medications may be more
difficult to distribute medication.
Source 4: Kim J C, Watts C H. Gaining a foothold: tackling poverty, gender inequality, and HIV
in Africa BMJ 2005; 331 :769 doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7519.769
The authors here argue that HIV and AIDS, poverty, and gender inequalities must be addressed
and tackled. But more specifically, they claim that in order to decrease HIV and AIDS, a solution
must first be found for poverty and gender inequalities. In women there is sexual abuse as well as
trading sex for survival that forces women to be at higher risk. This also contributes to poverty
because women are unable to support themselves without involving shameful work.
This could be impactful in my essay because it shows an additional way and perspective in
which to prevent and decrease the spread of HIV and AIDS. It will be interesting to discuss the
reasons as to why women are the majority of those with diagnosed HIV, and how to stop gender
inequality in Africa. The article will be supportive in parts of the essay where I want to bring up
methods to prevent HIV.
Source 5: Treichler, Paula A. “AIDS, Homophobia, and Biomedical Discourse: An Epidemic of
Signification.” October, vol. 43, The MIT Press, 1987, pp. 31–70,
https://doi.org/10.2307/3397564.
In Treichler’s piece, she argues that AIDS is not a clear cut disease, but rather it was created
from language and how we have made up all facts about AIDS and believed them to be true. She
claims that in order to change the way we see AIDS, we must go to the exact moment where its
meaning was initially created and stop it. We must have a new understanding of HIV and AIDS
in order to find new research and stop the levels of the disease from increasing.
This will be important in my essay because I bring up a lot about women making up the majority
of those diagnosed with HIV. In Treichler’s writing, she talks about how AIDS is not just for gay
people it is for people in interesting work situations, drug users, and Africans are just as
susceptible, which goes along with my argument. So far, I believe this will go in my discussion
and analysis about the details of who HIV affects.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment