256 Psychology of Women and Gender
of the methods but of the methods themselves. Psychology,
some feminist critics have charged, overrelies on laboratory
experimentation, which strips away social context (Parlee,
1979). Some feminists have pointed out that psychology has
a long but hidden tradition of inquiry that goes beyond labo-
ratory experimentation (Marecek, Fine, & Kidder, 1997).
Field research, observational techniques, content analysis,
participant-observation, focus groups, and case studies are a
few examples. A growing number of feminist researchers
use these approaches as well as new modes of inquiry,
such as discourse analysis, that draw on postmodern thought.
The call for methodological pluralism has had some ef-
fects, at least in some feminist circles. Feminism and Psy-
chology,published in the United Kingdom and intended for
an international readership, routinely publishes work using
innovative approaches. Special issues of Psychology of
Women Quarterlyin 1989 and 1999 have focused on innova-
tive methods and theory.
CLINICAL PRACTICE, COUNSELING,
AND FEMINIST THERAPY
During the 1960s, the mental health professions came under
strong criticism from various social movements, including
the women’s movement. At that time, psychoanalytic theo-
ries held sway among most psychotherapists, including most
clinical psychologists. Feminists assailed these theories on a
number of grounds. They charged that they restricted women
to domestic roles; they established heterosexuality, marriage,
and motherhood as criteria for normality and maturity; they
reduced women’s ambitions and achievements to pathologi-
cal expressions of penis envy; and they blamed a wide array
of psychological problems and social ills on mothers. Mental
health professionals claimed the authority of science to back
their assertions about normality and abnormality, but femi-
nists pointed out that these assertions often were based on
cultural ideology.
One of the most powerful early critics was Naomi
Weisstein, who took clinical and personality theories to task.
“Psychology,” she said, “has nothing to say about what
women really are like, what they need, and what they want,
essentially because psychology does not know” (1971,
pp. 207, 209). Another influential critique was that of Inge
Broverman and her colleagues (Broverman, Broverman,
Clarkson, Rosenkrantz & Vogel, 1970). Using an adjective
checklist, they showed that the traits that therapists ascribed
to the ideal man resembled those they ascribed to a mentally
healthy person, while traits ascribed to the ideal woman
resembled those ascribed to “a typical mental patient.” In
Women and Madness,Phyllis Chesler (1972) charged that the
therapy professions placed women in a double bind: Women
who violated norms of femininity were stigmatized, yet such
norms (e.g., emotional expressiveness and dependence) were
also used as indicators of mental disorders such as hysteria
and dependent personality disorder.
Another concern feminists raised during the 1960s and
1970s was that men dominated the mental health field. Men
held most of the powerful positions in professional organiza-
tions, educational institutions, and mental health research
settings. Most clinical psychologists were men, yet most con-
sumers of psychotherapy were women. Feminists charged
that therapy relationships, which usually consisted of a male
therapist and a female patient, replicated the cultural norm of
male dominance and female subordination. Rather than help-
ing women to move beyond passivity and dependence, such
therapy perpetuated women’s reliance on men’s judgments of
their normality and women’s dependence on male approval
and validation. Feminists believed that if women shared con-
trol of the field and brought women-centered perspectives to
clinical psychology, patterns of knowledge and clinical care
for women would improve.
The early criticisms that feminists made touched off what
became a sustained movement to reform knowledge and
practice in clinical and counseling psychology. The concerns
raised—that cultural biases permeate scientific constructs;
that therapists too readily ignore the social context or under-
estimate its influence; that sexism and other biases are
embedded in diagnostic constructs and practices; that power
differences in therapy can work against clients’ interest—still
thread through feminist clinical psychology today. In re-
sponse to these concerns, feminists have developed alternate
theories and conducted innovative research. They have also
developed feminist-inspired therapies and diagnostic prac-
tices. Feminists have also worked to improve the conditions
of work for women who are therapists. They have addressed
the rights of therapy clients and promoted changes in the APA
ethical code in order to provide better protection for clients.
The scope of feminist knowledge in clinical psychology is
wide, and feminists have devised many approaches to under-
standing and treating individual women and girls, heterosex-
ual and same-sex couples and families, and men. There
are three journals concerned with feminist practice and
women-centered therapies: Women and Therapy,theJournal
of Feminist Family Therapy,andAffilia. In addition, Femi-
nism and PsychologyandPsychology of Women Quarterly
frequently publish research on clinical disorders of women,
such as eating disorders and depression, as well as on aspects
of diagnosis and treatment. Researchers and practitioners
have developed a sophisticated understanding of how gender