Gillian Youngs, "Making the Virtual Real:
Feminist Challenges in the Twenty-First Century" (Page 4 of 5)
Cyberfeminism and the politics of ICTs
There are evident celebratory threads in cyberfeminism, some of which
touch on the new public presence and connectivity ICTs facilitate for
women, referred to above, and others of which focus on areas such as
creativity, play, work, and online gender transcendence. One of the
notable characteristics of cyberfeminism is its attention to the
imaginings of women online, both individual and collective. I see
cyberfeminism as a definite expansion of the consideration and
assessment of how women think about each other and the world generally,
of how they express, share, and put their ideas in practice, for
instance, in forming new communities or businesses or launching
political campaigns or organizations.
Cyberfeminism can in part be seen as both a set of responses to the
woman-machine interface and an ongoing recognition that much more may be
possible than we have even begun to imagine. Cyberfeminism has done much
to focus attention on the politics of ICTs, and this work has wide
relevance to the new Internet era writ large, to men's and women's
experience of and reactions to it, and to the social shifts that are
arising from it. Thus, I view cyberfeminism as a major contribution to
wider social analysis of Internet developments, applicable far beyond
the concerns of feminism and women, and with insights that are relevant
to the evolving nature of politics in the hybrid geospatial and
sociospatial world.
Cyberfeminism recognizes and works with that hybridity; it is thus
one of the new trends in social analysis that integrate the
communicative spaces of the virtual sphere with the more familiar
concrete offline settings of social activity. Cyberfeminism is also best
viewed as a site of debate and philosophical contestation as well as of
practical application, because, in line with the history of feminist
thought and action, variety and disagreement, contrasting perspectives
and tensions, are fully in evidence. So there is a rich politics around
and within cyberfeminism itself, featuring the familiar oppositions of
utopian and fearful interpretations, hopes and aspirations as well as
suspicions.
Cyberfeminism has highlighted continuity as much as discontinuity
(the old as well as the new)—for example, in the area of connectivity
and networking. Much feminist analysis of ICTs has emphasized that
networking did not begin with the Internet but was already well
established in women's and feminist (as well as other forms of)
politics, and also that familiar modes of networking, such as
newsletters, briefings, and face-to-face gatherings, continue alongside
and interact with new online modes.[14]
Use of the Internet
expands networking rather than introducing it as a whole new phenomenon,
and it builds on skills that have been applied for a long time.
Cyberfeminist debates recall and revisit history, and recontextualize
it in new circumstances, as much as they make entirely new discoveries.
And, I would argue, this is one of cyberfeminism's strengths, one of the
lessons it offers to other forms of social analysis of ICTs. A key area
in this regard is women's problematic relationship to science and
technology, fields that have tended historically to be dominated by men
and masculinist (western-centred) cultures.[15]
If we take deep
account of the ways in which the new cyber age is based on the long
history of the dominant masculinist scientific paradigm, we realize that
there will be an uphill battle for women to be fully included in this
new age at every level of theory, practice, and policy.
Here we come to the dualisms that have shaped gender relations and
identities. The science-over-nature pairing joins with male-over-female,
rationality-over-emotion, and mind-over-body oppositions.[16] If
anything, the weight of these mutually reinforcing dualisms is all the
more powerful in an age where increasing amounts of social activity and
connection are technologically mediated. Their definitional,
institutionalized, and discursive roles in asserting and maintaining
power relations between masculine and feminine influences, between men
and women, in theory as well as in practice, are more important than
they have ever been.
I would make two points about this situation. The first is that it
reaffirms both the relevance of feminist analysis, and its focus on
these dualistic notions and orientations, to questions about how the
world works and who has the power (both in terms of identities and
opportunities) to change and improve it. The binding of the dominant
male world to the potency of science and technology and their
rationalistic tendencies, and the driving forces these represent in the
constant expansion of industrial and post-industrial capitalism, is
fundamental to the times we live in.
Science and technology-over-nature modes of thinking are partly to
blame for the inadequate attention to the negative side effects of such
expansion. These include the growing problem of overconsumption
alongside expanding, pollution-generating production. The expansion also
features extreme inequalities between the richest and poorest countries
as well as between those at different ends of the wealth scale within
them.[17]
What is frequently not sufficiently recognized is how
much ICTs contribute to furthering consumption and production trends.
Constant innovation and the replacement of old with new technology have
never been higher priorities, resulting in mountains of junked and often
barely used hardware. Once again we have crucial continuities with the
industrial era in so-called post-industrial or virtual processes. There
are disjunctures and new possibilities (including the replacement of
teleprocesses for polluting jet and car travel) alongside the embedding
of old tendencies.
Feminists have emphasized the connection between technological
science and nature,[18]
rather than the separation and hierarchy
of the former over the latter, and also the need to think about
"embodied political economy."[19]
These arguments have a greater
role than ever in current debates about the radical changes needed to
avert extreme levels of environmental damage associated with modern and
postmodern economies and lifestyles.
The second point I want to raise is that the strand of feminist
critique and activism in the areas of science and technology is now
expanding significantly, thanks to new focus on ICTs and their
far-reaching implications. My assessment is that this will be a major
feminist trajectory for the future, building on the vital early work on
gender and technology of such individuals as Cynthia Cockburn, Swasti
Mitter, and Sheila Rowbotham, to name a few.[20]
Gendered
relations to technology are intimately bound to gendered divisions of
labor and the education, training, and skills associated with
them.[21]
Feminist theory, activism, and policy work is addressing how ICTs are
contributing to the global reshaping of our lives and work and creating
new and embedded gender inequalities, as well as fresh potential, which
is being harnessed by women across North and South. At issue here are
technological capacities, know-how, and applications, as well as the
policy structures and decision-making processes that impact on them. The
historic dominance of the realms of science and technology by men and
masculinist culture continues to be relevant to the ICT age. And the
fact that ICTs are becoming integral to growing areas of educational,
political, economic, and cultural activity means that technological
gender inequalities threaten to become even more pervasive in both
direct and indirect ways.
Women's and girls' disadvantages in terms of access to education and
skills, income and available time, are all in play when we consider
their potential for full engagement and empowerment in the ICT era,
especially in poorer societies and sectors of society. It is clear that
many aspects of women's and girls' social positioning and experience
impact on this potential. Sophia Huyer has therefore explained that
there needs to be an "enabling environment" supporting women's equal
access to ICTs and their benefits, and that this needs to incorporate
policy and regulatory frameworks.[22]
There also needs to be
"content" addressing women's social and economic concerns, efforts to
increase their representation in science and technology education and
training, expanded women's employment in ICTs, and support for women's
SMEs (small- and medium-sized business enterprises) and earning in this
area, and "e-governance" processes that are inclusive for women and
their interests and rights.
|