페미니스트 과학기술학: 두 판 사이의 차이

3,935 바이트 추가됨 ,  2023년 2월 26일 (일)
편집 요약 없음
편집 요약 없음
편집 요약 없음
24번째 줄: 24번째 줄:
한편 [[퀴어]] 커뮤니티에서 수십년동안 이뤄진 [[신체개조]] 실천에 대한 연구는 자신의 몸을 물리적으로 변경함으로서 자신의 다양한 젠더를 드러내고 창출하는 사람들을 통해 젠더와 기술 간의 물질적 연결을 제시하며,<ref>{{책 인용 |last=Pitts |first=Victoria L. |title=Visibly Queer |date=2003 |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781403979438_4 |work=In the Flesh |pages=87–118 |place=New York |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan US |doi=10.1057/9781403979438_4 |isbn=978-1-349-38736-6 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref>, 더 나아가 이항적 용어 너머의 젠더에 대한 학술문헌을 수립하고, 퀴어 이론과 페미니스트 과학기술학을 연결하였다.
한편 [[퀴어]] 커뮤니티에서 수십년동안 이뤄진 [[신체개조]] 실천에 대한 연구는 자신의 몸을 물리적으로 변경함으로서 자신의 다양한 젠더를 드러내고 창출하는 사람들을 통해 젠더와 기술 간의 물질적 연결을 제시하며,<ref>{{책 인용 |last=Pitts |first=Victoria L. |title=Visibly Queer |date=2003 |url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781403979438_4 |work=In the Flesh |pages=87–118 |place=New York |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan US |doi=10.1057/9781403979438_4 |isbn=978-1-349-38736-6 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref>, 더 나아가 이항적 용어 너머의 젠더에 대한 학술문헌을 수립하고, 퀴어 이론과 페미니스트 과학기술학을 연결하였다.


기존의 과학적 지식의 객관성에 문제를 제기하는 연구들이 생물학적 성의 서술에 사용되는 언어를 문제시하는 데 그쳤던 것에 비해<ref name="mar91">{{저널 인용|last=Martin |first=Emily |title=The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles |date=1991 |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/494680 |work=Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society |pages=179–189 |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |권=16 |호=3|쪽=485-501 |doi=10.1086/494680 |issn=0097-9740 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref>, 이 시대의 연구자들은 젠더기반 프레임워크를 이용한 재생성적 연구로 접근했다. 레이나 랩{{s|Rayna Rapp}}은 여성의 생산적 [[생의료화]]{{s|biomedicalization}}에 대한 영향을 다룬 연구에서 페미니스트 이데올로기를 강조하는 반면<ref name="mar91" />, 로라 마모{{s|Laura Mamo}}의 6년 후에 있었던 레즈비언 재생산에 대한 지식협상에 대한 탐구는 상황화된 지식을 강조했다<ref>{{저널 인용|last=Mamo |first=Laura |date=May 2007 |title=Negotiating Conception |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0162243906298355 |journal=Science, Technology, & Human Values |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=369–393 |doi=10.1177/0162243906298355 |s2cid=143853418 |issn=0162-2439}}</ref>.
기존의 과학적 지식의 객관성에 문제를 제기하는 연구들이 생물학적 성의 서술에 사용되는 언어를 문제시하는 데 그쳤던 것에 비해<ref name="mar91">{{저널 인용|last=Martin |first=Emily |title=The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles |date=1991 |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/494680 |work=Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society |pages=179–189 |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |권=16 |호=3|쪽=485-501 |doi=10.1086/494680 |issn=0097-9740 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref>, 이 시대의 연구자들은 젠더기반 프레임워크를 이용한 재생성적 연구로 접근했다. 레이나 랩{{s|Rayna Rapp}}은 여성의 생산적 [[생의료화]]{{s|biomedicalization}}에 대한 영향을 다룬 연구에서 페미니스트 이데올로기를 강조하는 반면<ref name="mar91" />, 로라 마모{{s|Laura Mamo}}의 6년 후에 있었던 레즈비언 재생산에 대한 지식협상에 대한 탐구는 상황화된 지식을 강조했다<ref>{{저널 인용|last=Mamo |first=Laura |date=May 2007 |title=Negotiating Conception |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0162243906298355 |journal=Science, Technology, & Human Values |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=369–393 |doi=10.1177/0162243906298355 |s2cid=143853418 |issn=0162-2439}}</ref>. 이 연구들은 여성성이 연구 주제에 반영될 다양한 가능성을 발견했으며, 웬디 포크너의 2001년 논문과 동일한 결론을
<!--Both studies found multiple possibilities of femininity reflected in their research subjects, similar to Wendy Faulkner's conclusions in her 2001 study on limitations to women's participation in engineering which proposes a radical shift in culture to emphasize the necessity of women in technology development to counteract masculinity being embedded in technological [[Cultural artefact|artefact]]s by men who create them.<ref name=":5" /> As with past feminist STS research, these studies were similarly critiqued for use of binary concepts like masculinity and femininity which suggested gender existed separate from its relationship to technology, contradicting the material-semiotic stance of the field.<ref name=":9" />  -->
<!--Both studies found multiple possibilities of femininity reflected in their research subjects, similar to Wendy Faulkner's conclusions in her 2001 study on limitations to women's participation in engineering which proposes a radical shift in culture to emphasize the necessity of women in technology development to counteract masculinity being embedded in technological [[Cultural artefact|artefact]]s by men who create them.<ref name=":5" /> As with past feminist STS research, these studies were similarly critiqued for use of binary concepts like masculinity and femininity which suggested gender existed separate from its relationship to technology, contradicting the material-semiotic stance of the field.<ref name=":9" />
    
Continuing with the user trials conducted alongside Trevor Pinch, Nancy Oudshoorn problematized creating technologies designed for use by everyone as different users have different needs.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal |last1=Oudshoorn |first1=Nelly |last2=Rommes |first2=Els |last3=Stienstra |first3=Marcelle |date=January 2004 |title=Configuring the User as Everybody: Gender and Design Cultures in Information and Communication Technologies |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243903259190 |journal=Science, Technology, & Human Values |volume=29 |issue=1 |pages=30–63 |doi=10.1177/0162243903259190 |s2cid=14181170 |issn=0162-2439}}</ref> Oudshoorn's research explored the development of two digital cities, New Topia and DDS, created by development teams with intentions of being inclusive to a diverse range of users.<ref name=":7" /> By not considering needs of users which were impacted by identity, specifically gender, assumptions were made in the design process based on the designers gender, embedding these gendered assumptions into the technology.<ref name=":7" /> As the software engineers were male, the conclusion presented was that their products reflected masculinity,<ref name=":7" /> and though this acknowledges the co-construction of gender and technology, this conclusion was critiqued for reliance on binary historical concepts where gender is possessed rather than created.<ref name=":8">{{Citation |last=Wajcman |first=Judy |title=Feminist theories of technology |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412990127.n9 |work=Handbook of Science and Technology Studies |year=1995 |pages=189–204 |place= |publisher=SAGE Publications Inc. |doi=10.4135/9781412990127.n9 |isbn=9780761924982 |access-date=14 April 2022}}</ref>
 
Gender as an interactive, social performance in feminist STS is an achievement resulting from the historical evolution of feminism from the [[postmodern]] age in the 1970s to the feminist technoscience of the digital age, the nuances of this fluid history of many feminisms presented by Judy Wajcman in 2010.<ref name=":8" /> This complex process is a significant discovery, as much of the field's research prior to this point implied that all men possessed a fixed masculinity, contrasting researcher's claims of rejecting binary gender descriptions in their research.<ref name=":8" /> "Technofeminism" in STS strengthened connections between feminist STS and queer studies due to this overlapping gender theory, shifting the discipline towards research which no longer relied on [[determinism]] in labelling their subjects to criticize [[gender inequality]] and power dynamics in STS.<ref name=":9" /> This shift in epistemology appeared in research through studies on [[Body hacking|biohacking]] technologies, such as [[hormone]] injection, health [[Dietary supplement|supplements]], and body implants,<ref>{{Citation |last=Malatino |first=Hil |title=Biohacking Gender |date=2021-04-17 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003099130-20 |work=Tranimacies |pages=176–187 |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9781003099130-20 |isbn=978-1-003-09913-0 |s2cid=243310551 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref> establishing a literal connection to Haraway's cyborg metaphor through physically linking bodies and machines in addition to a theoretical connection to the power these links hold to transcend the limits of the human body, specifically gender.<ref>{{Citation |last=Haraway |first=Donna J. |title=A Cyborg Manifesto |date=2016-04-01 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5749/minnesota/9780816650477.003.0001 |work=Manifestly Haraway |pages=3–90 |publisher=University of Minnesota Press |doi=10.5749/minnesota/9780816650477.003.0001 |isbn=9780816650477 |s2cid=8780351 |access-date=2022-04-14}}</ref> -->


== 핵심개념 ==
== 핵심개념 ==
42번째 줄: 46번째 줄:
== 참고문헌 ==
== 참고문헌 ==
* {{책 인용|저자=[[주디 와이즈먼]]|제목=[[테크노페미니즘]]|출판사=[[궁리]]|날짜=2009|ISBN=978-89-5820-174-8|ref=CITEREF와이즈먼2009}}, 원전: {{책 인용|성=Wajcman|이름=Judy|제목=TechnoFeminism|출판사=Polity press|ISBN=0-7456-3043-X|날짜=2004}}
* {{책 인용|저자=[[주디 와이즈먼]]|제목=[[테크노페미니즘]]|출판사=[[궁리]]|날짜=2009|ISBN=978-89-5820-174-8|ref=CITEREF와이즈먼2009}}, 원전: {{책 인용|성=Wajcman|이름=Judy|제목=TechnoFeminism|출판사=Polity press|ISBN=0-7456-3043-X|날짜=2004}}
{{번역|Feminist science and technology studies}}


[[분류:분야별 페미니즘]]
[[분류:분야별 페미니즘]]
[[분류:과학기술연구]]
[[분류:과학기술연구]]