Abstract
In this article I examine peer review (refereeing) of manuscripts for geography journals, focusing in particular upon the discourse of refereeing. I suggest that this discourse is constituted through seemingly banal practices and that it constructs and positions referees, the conceptual space of geography, and the knowledge produced by academics about specific places. Drawing upon feminist theory, I suggest that the dominant practice of “blind” (and “double-blind”) refereeing relies upon a masculinist model of “objectivity” that is disembodied, impartial, and unlocated. This approach to peer review, I argue, genders geographic theory, reconstitutes abstract Cartesian space, and effaces place.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
