Reflections on the “The Evolutionary Brotherhood: Manliness and Experimental Zoology in 19th-century America,” Jenna Tonn.

 This lecture on “Evolutionary Brotherhood” was led by Professor Jenna Tonn, a visiting professor at Boston College in Science and Technology Studies. Jenna is an alumnus of Harvard’s History of Science department where she received her Ph.D. Her research focuses on the cultural elements surrounding the history of science. She specializes in analyzing the role women played in stem fields throughout history. So, it makes sense that Tonn would know to teach a lecture on “manliness” in the field of zoology as this would be adjacent to her area of Focus.  Even though I don’t have any experience or interest in the field of zoology, I chose to attend this lecture because of my curiosity about the concept of “manliness”. It was interesting to have the word manliness present in the same sentence as “Experimental Zoology” because manliness in the 21st century is usually associated with physical strength and athletics. It’s not a concept that is thought to be synonymous with the wor

k of scientists in a lab. So, to learn more about the connection between these two distance topics, I decided to attend the talk.

         Throughout the discussion, the central question that Professor Tonn posed to us was “What does it mean to be a man in a lab?” The first answer to this question can be found by analyzing the brotherhood scientist created. In the 19th century, a zoologist by the name of E.L. Mark sought to replace the scientific traditions of the famous biologist Louis Agassiz with his own more experimental version of zoology. Due to Agassiz’s prominence and influence in the scientific community at this time, Mark had a hard time trying to achieve this goal. To combat the prestige Agassiz had, Mark created an all-male scientific community/brotherhood called the “X-men”. These “X-men” were more than just lab partners. They were drinking buddies, roommates, and sometimes confidants.  This dynamic allowed them to create unwavering support amongst themselves to push their form of zoology forward. The fraternal masculinity that the X-men produced was useful to create a better lab environment, but it often left little room for variation in the characteristics scientists could possess. The biggest limiter that the creation of a scientific brotherhood placed on the lab is the exclusion of women. This is evident when Professor Tonn presents the way male scientists talked about the women who attended Radcliffe College and worked in museums. They were often characterized as such individuals as “freaks” not worthy of marriage. References like this showcase the social stigma of a female intellectual in the 19th century. A woman could not engage in the fraternal masculinity that became a defining feature of college labs. This means, that a woman entering the space could only expect nothing but isolation and ostracization. Therefore, rendering the lab a place not friendly to anyone who wasn’t a man.

      The second answer to the central question of “what does it mean to be a man in the lab” can be found in the connection between scientists and physical strength. Laboratories in the 19th century were regarded as places of great suffering. This was due to the long hour’s scientist had to put in and the drab nature of the laboratory setting.  A characterization like this, gave the scientists a sense of heroism as they seemed to be giving up their bodies for the progression of science. Ironically, it’s the same way athletes are looked at it in the 21st century. The link between physical strength and science meant that those with physical disabilities were often looked at as incapable researchers. A scientist in Mark’s lab who went by the name S. Judd lost his arm in a machine accident was described by his colleagues as “Not very strong. He must not fare well in the lab”. Here we see that the umbrella of the masculinity necessary to be in a lab did not cover those with physical ailments. This was shocking to me because, now if someone loses a limb, like a soldier, they are seen as more masculine because it is proof of struggle. Also, the measure of manliness through your health in laboratory spaces is a counterproductive tool that can only delay progress.