페미니스트 과학기술학: 두 판 사이의 차이

페미니스트 과학기술학 (원본 보기)

2023년 1월 17일 (화) 21:05 판

67 바이트 추가됨 , 2023년 1월 17일 (화)

잔글

편집 요약 없음

Ellif

사무관, 인터페이스 관리자, 관리자

편집

7,240

번

@@ 9번째 줄: / 9번째 줄: @@
 페미니스트 STS는 1980년대 페미니즘 이론이 [[과학기술연구]]에 도입되면서 생겨났으며 1985년 발표된 [[도나 헤러웨이]]의 〈[[사이보그 매니페스토]]〉에도 큰 영향을 받았다<ref name="law08" />. 이 학제는 객관성 및 기술결정주의에 대한 비판에 대한 대응으로서 [[기술의 사회구성]]{{s|Social construction of technology, SCOT}} 및 [[행위자-연결망 이론]]{{s|Actor-network theory, ANT}}와 함께 저명성을 얻게 되었다<ref name="law08" />. 초기 페미니스트 STS 문헌들은 거주시설의 전화기에 대한 [[클라우드 피셔]]{{s|Claude S. Fischer}}의 연구<ref name="fis88">{{저널 인용 |last=Fischer |first=Claude S. |date=1988 |title=Gender and the residential telephone, 1890—1940: Technologies of sociability |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/684365 |journal=Sociological Forum |volume=3 |issue=2 |pages=211–233 |doi=10.1007/bf01115291 |s2cid=143901327 |issn=0884-8971}}</ref>나 신시아 쿡번, 수잔 옴로드의 [[전자레인지]] 에 대한 연구와 같이 기술 사용에 있어서의 젠더 차이에 집중했다<ref name="wa00" />.
-아델 클라크와 테레사 몬티니의 [[낙태약]] 기술 RU486에 대한 대립장{{s|arena}} 분석<ref name=":3">{{저널 인용 |last1=Clarke |first1=Adele |last2=Montini |first2=Theresa |날짜=1993-01 |title=The Many Faces of RU486: Tales of Situated Knowledges and Technological Contestations |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016224399301800104 |journal=Science, Technology, & Human Values |volume=18 |issue=1 |pages=42–78 |doi=10.1177/016224399301800104 |pmid=11652075 |s2cid=37831193 |issn=0162-2439}}</ref>을 포함한 초기 페미니스트 STS 연구자들은 다른 방식으로 기술과 상호작용하는 남성과 여성을 보여주기 위해 [[사례분석]] 방법론을 사용했다<ref name="wa00" />.
+아델 클라크와 테레사 몬티니의 [[낙태약]] 기술 RU486에 대한 대립장{{s|arena}} 분석<ref name="ct93">{{저널 인용 |last1=Clarke |first1=Adele |last2=Montini |first2=Theresa |날짜=1993-01 |title=The Many Faces of RU486: Tales of Situated Knowledges and Technological Contestations |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/016224399301800104 |journal=Science, Technology, & Human Values |volume=18 |issue=1 |pages=42–78 |doi=10.1177/016224399301800104 |pmid=11652075 |s2cid=37831193 |issn=0162-2439}}</ref>을 포함한 초기 페미니스트 STS 연구자들은 다른 방식으로 기술과 상호작용하는 남성과 여성을 보여주기 위해 [[사례분석]] 방법론을 사용했다<ref name="wa00" />. 이러한 연구들은 사회적 상호작용 속에서 남성성이나 여성성에 따라 기술과 결합되는 방식을 구축했다는 점에서 중요했다. 연구들은 남성성과 여성성을 구분짓는 방식이 이항적 구축물이 아닌 다층적임을 보여줬을 뿐만이 아니라 상황화된 지식의 증거, 즉 중립적 주체나 연구자가 존재하지 않는다는 생각의 근거를 제시하였다<ref name="ct93">.
-<!-- These studies were significant for establishing how people come to associate technology with masculinity or femininity through social interaction.<ref name=":2" /> In addition to determining masculinity and femininity are multiple rather than binary constructs, research showed evidence of situated knowledges, or, the idea that there is no such thing as a neutral subject or researcher.<ref name=":3" /> From establishing a presence in [[pharmaceutical]] and commercial technologies, feminist STS expanded into questioning the dominant authority of science by the early 1990s, borrowing [[methodology]] from ANT to expand upon prior research.<ref name=":3" /> Theory and methods from SCOT were also incorporated into the discipline as researchers began to explore the process through which gender becomes embedded within technology, with studies adopting principles of [[social constructivism]], for example, [[Judy Wajcman]]'s research on the culture of [[engineering]].<ref name=":3" /> Other feminist STS studies throughout the 1990s were also influenced by the work of [[Steve Woolgar]] and his research on how technology is designed with users in mind,<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=Woolgar |first=Steve |date=May 1990 |title=Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03349.x |journal=The Sociological Review |volume=38 |issue=1_suppl |pages=58–99 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03349.x |s2cid=145786443 |issn=0038-0261}}</ref> such as [[Trevor Pinch]] and [[Nancy Oudshoorn]], who continued research into user configuration into the 2000s.<ref name=":4">{{cite book |editor1-last=Oudshoorn |editor1-first=Nelly |editor2-last=Pinch |editor2-first=Trevor |title=How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies |date=2005 |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, Mass., U.S. |isbn=9780262281119 |chapter=Introduction: How users and non-users matter |volume=1-25 |pages=1–8 |doi=10.7551/mitpress/3592.001.0001 |chapter-url=https://eusp.org/sites/default/files/archive/stories/library/Exhibitions/0061087.pdf}}</ref>
+<!--  From establishing a presence in [[pharmaceutical]] and commercial technologies, feminist STS expanded into questioning the dominant authority of science by the early 1990s, borrowing [[methodology]] from ANT to expand upon prior research.<ref name=":3" /> Theory and methods from SCOT were also incorporated into the discipline as researchers began to explore the process through which gender becomes embedded within technology, with studies adopting principles of [[social constructivism]], for example, [[Judy Wajcman]]'s research on the culture of [[engineering]].<ref name=":3" /> Other feminist STS studies throughout the 1990s were also influenced by the work of [[Steve Woolgar]] and his research on how technology is designed with users in mind,<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=Woolgar |first=Steve |date=May 1990 |title=Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03349.x |journal=The Sociological Review |volume=38 |issue=1_suppl |pages=58–99 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03349.x |s2cid=145786443 |issn=0038-0261}}</ref> such as [[Trevor Pinch]] and [[Nancy Oudshoorn]], who continued research into user configuration into the 2000s.<ref name=":4">{{cite book |editor1-last=Oudshoorn |editor1-first=Nelly |editor2-last=Pinch |editor2-first=Trevor |title=How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies |date=2005 |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, Mass., U.S. |isbn=9780262281119 |chapter=Introduction: How users and non-users matter |volume=1-25 |pages=1–8 |doi=10.7551/mitpress/3592.001.0001 |chapter-url=https://eusp.org/sites/default/files/archive/stories/library/Exhibitions/0061087.pdf}}</ref>
 [[File:Ways to increase women's and girls' interests in STEM fields.png|alt=This chart lists multiple social factors involved in growing women and girls' presence in STEM from the societal level to the internal motivations of the individual. The various factors listed reflect the radical culture change which would have to occur to correct this imbalance.|thumb|A diagram proposing methods to increase women's presence in STEM fields, acknowledging gender discrepancies in STEM participation. This shows the many social limitations to participation in science and technology in our current reality.]]
 Interrogating scientific knowledge through introducing new theories and methods to feminist STS led to conflicts within the field related to the categories of [[sex]] and gender and how they are used in research.<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal |last=Faulkner |first=Wendy |date=January 2001 |title=The technology question in feminism |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0277-5395(00)00166-7 |journal=Women's Studies International Forum |volume=24 |issue=1 |pages=79–95 |doi=10.1016/s0277-5395(00)00166-7 |issn=0277-5395}}</ref> Trevor Pinch and [[Wiebe Bijker]], SCOT researchers, proposed "interpretive flexibility" to explain different social group's varied responses to technology, gender reflected as a relevant social group.<ref name=":4" /> Pinch was critical of Woolgar's previous research on users of technology as the design process of technological products had not been considered, proposing "symmetry", where humans impact technology equal to how technology impacts humans.<ref name=":4" /> The symmetry approach addressed the co-constructive relationship between gender and technology,<ref name=":4" /> though was critiqued for ignoring historically-relevant power imbalances in how gender and technology relate to one another.<ref name=":5" />