[Andreasen, R. 2000. Race: biological reality or social construct? Philosophy of Science 67: S653–66.10.1086/392853]Search in Google Scholar
[Ásta K. Sveinsdóttir. 2011. The metaphysics of sex and gender. In Feminist Metaphysics: Explorations in the Ontology of Sex, Gender and the Self, ed. by C. Witt. Springer, 47–65.10.1007/978-90-481-3783-1_4]Search in Google Scholar
[Barnes, E. 2014. Going beyond the fundamental: feminism in contemporary metaphysics. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 104(3): 335–51.10.1111/j.1467-9264.2014.00376.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Barnes, E. 2017. Realism and social Structure. Philosophical Studies 174(10): 2417–33. DOI: 10.1007/s11098-016-0743-y10.1007/s11098-016-0743-y]Search in Google Scholar
[Bettcher, T. 2013. Trans women and the meaning of ‘woman’. In Philosophy of Sex: Contemporary Readings, Sixth Edition, ed. by A. Soble, N. Power and R. Halwani. Rowan and Littlefield, 233–50.]Search in Google Scholar
[Boghossian, P. 2006. Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism, Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199287185.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Chalmers, D. 2011. Verbal disputes. Philosophical Review 120(4): 515–66.10.1215/00318108-1334478]Search in Google Scholar
[Díaz-León, E. 2012. Social kinds, conceptual analysis, and the operative concept: a reply to Haslanger. Humana.Mente—Journal of Philosophical Studies 22: 57–74.]Search in Google Scholar
[Díaz-León, E. 2015. In defence of historical constructivism about races. Ergo 2(21): 247–62.10.3998/ergo.12405314.0002.021]Search in Google Scholar
[Díaz-León, E. 2016. Woman as a politically significant term: a solution to the puzzle. Hypatia 31(2): 245–58.10.1111/hypa.12234]Search in Google Scholar
[Díaz-León, E. (ms.) Substantive metaphysical debates about gender and race: verbal disputes and metaphysical deflationism. Glasgow, J. 2009. A Theory of Race. Routledge.]Search in Google Scholar
[Haslanger, S. 2000. Gender and race: (what) are they? (What) do we want them to be? Nous 34(1): 31–55.10.1111/0029-4624.00201]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Haslanger, S. 2005. What are we talking about? The semantics and politics of social kinds. Hypatia 20(4): 10–26.10.1111/j.1527-2001.2005.tb00533.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Haslanger, S. 2006. What good are our intuitions? Philosophical analysis and social kinds. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Sup. Vol. 80(1): 89–118.10.1111/j.1467-8349.2006.00139.x]Search in Google Scholar
[Haslanger, S. 2016. What is a (social) structural explanation? Philosophical Studies 173: 113–30.10.1007/s11098-014-0434-5]Search in Google Scholar
[Jeffers, C. 2013. The cultural theory of race: yet another look at Du Bois’s ‘The Conservation of Races’. Ethics 123(3): 403–26.10.1086/669566]Search in Google Scholar
[Jenkins, K. 2016. Amelioration and inclusion: gender identity and the concept of Woman. Ethics 126(2): 394–421.10.1086/683535]Search in Google Scholar
[Ludwig, D. 2015. Against the new metaphysics of race. Philosophy of Science 82(2): 244–65.10.1086/680487]Search in Google Scholar
[Mallon, R. 2006. Race: normative, not metaphysical or semantic. Ethics 116(3): 525–51.10.1086/500495]Search in Google Scholar
[Mikkola, M. 2011. Ontological commitments, sex and gender. In Feminist Metaphysics: Explorations in the Ontology of Sex, Gender and the Self, ed. by C. Witt. Springer, 67–83.10.1007/978-90-481-3783-1_5]Search in Google Scholar
[Mikkola, M. 2016. Feminist metaphysics and philosophical methodology. Philosophy Compass 11(11): 661–70.10.1111/phc3.12349]Search in Google Scholar
[Plunkett, D. 2015. Which concepts should we use? Metalinguistic negotiations and the methodology of philosophy. Inquiry 58(7–8): 828–74.10.1080/0020174X.2015.1080184]Search in Google Scholar
[Putnam, H. 1981. Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511625398]Search in Google Scholar
[Schaffer, J. 2009. On what grounds what. In Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, ed. by D. Chalmers, D. Manley and R. Wasserman. Oxford University Press, 347–83.]Search in Google Scholar
[Saul, J. 2012. Politically significant terms and philosophy of language: methodological issues. In Out from the Shadows: Analytical Feminist Contributions to Traditional Philosophy, ed. by S. Crasnow and A. Superson. Oxford University Press, 195–216.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199855469.003.0009]Search in Google Scholar
[Sider, T. 2017. Substantivity in feminist metaphysics. Philosophical Studies 174(10): 2467–78. DOI:10.1007/s11098-016-0739-7.10.1007/s11098-016-0739-7]Search in Google Scholar
[Spencer, Q. 2014. A radical solution to the race problem. Philosophy of Science 81(5): 1025–38.10.1086/677694]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Thomasson, A. 2007. Ordinary Objects. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195319910.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Thomasson, A. 2008. Existence questions. Philosophical Studies 141(1): 63–78. Thomasson, A. 2015. Ontology Made Easy. Oxford University Press.10.1007/s11098-008-9263-8]Search in Google Scholar
[Thomasson, A. 2017. Metaphysical disputes and metalinguistic negotiation. Analytic Philosophy 58(1): 1–28.10.1111/phib.12087]Search in Google Scholar
[Witt, C. 2011. The Metaphysics of Gender. Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199740413.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar