FEMINIST TECHNOLOGY X BIOTECHNOLOGY
WHAT IS TECHNOLOGY?
Technology and gender have had a tumultuous relationship, not because gender and technology do not overlap, but rather because technology attempts to distance itself from gender despite being laced from our construction of “the dawn of tech”. Technology in our modern conception conjures images of the internet, hackers breaking into websites, drones, robots, and cell phones.
However, technology itself can be traced to the beginning of time depending on what we consider to be technology. Technology is often seen as a tool that supports science and scientific discovery (Sismondo 2010). However, technology can also be seen in the bowls, buckets, irrigation systems, heated pools, or wagons that were created way before the invention of the modern nation-state.
Beginning with hunter-gatherer tools we see clunky sharpened rocks to more refined sharpened blades. Despite being called tools, it is possible to consider these as pieces of early technology. Technology is thought to diverge into two categories: polytechnics and monotechnics. Polytechnics are defined as technology that is “life-oriented”, small scale, versatile and is useful in “pursuing many human goals”. Monotechnics are “mega machines” that increase our power beyond human capabilities which allows them to be referred to as dehumanizing (Sismondo 2010). Technology is often referred to as “applied science”. Following this line of thinking, the technology of ancient communities could be thought of as applied scientific solutions to problems faced by ancient communities.
There is little to no way we could know the “gender” roles that individuals took up in those ancient times unless there are explicit written records. However, we still project our contemporary understandings of gender and gender embodiment onto these ancient gender embodiments. In grade school classrooms, the hunter versus gatherer dichotomy created positions in which strong, active bodies were deemed hunters and weaker bodies were relegated as the passive gatherer. The active versus passive narrative is seen through science across multiple fields of study. The passive, dormant egg being used by the active strong sperm is just one way that contemporary gender understandings are coded into biology.
Since the inception of science and technology as a hard science, it has developed alongside masculinity in America, but the development of feminist technology has gained steam more recently. Let's explore that.
WHAT IS FEMINIST TECHNOLOGY?
Feminist technology is a mode of operating within the science and technology world. When science and technology first emerged, they were heavily dominated by men and their patriarchal views. As a result, the imagining of feminist science and technology began developing and is still being developed to this day. Feminist technology has yet to be entirely defined as it continues to change due to different understandings of it embodiment, practices, and roles in the liberation of women in the field and at large.
Science often utilizes biological essentialist takes to explain “sex-linked behavior differences” without considering the power of socially constructed gender roles imposed upon people. From the theory of different sexed brains to naturally occurring weakness in women, science and technology have used sex as a convenient method of separating and subjugating women in the hierarchy to maintain a binary gender dichotomy (Sterling 2012).
Feminist technology seeks to add a new lens to past, present, and future scientific discoveries. Feminist empiricists believe that there is still room for objectivity in science. These feminist empiricists hold that once values are removed from science and scientific discovery, purified and objective science is left. However, it has been so easy for researchers to find instances of value judgments being inserted into the scientific method and discoveries that it is hard to believe it is still possible (Sismondo 2010).
Sandpoint theory posits that a particular perspective, one that has lived through experiences, can better understand and theorize the effects of being in that positionality. For example, cisgender women would know more about sex-based discrimination in the workplace and thus their standpoint would give them a privileged view that cisgender men cannot see. It is a position that is actively engaging with the positionality.
Scientific communities continue to lack women, transgender, and non-binary representation, and as a result, science and technology will continue to lack the understanding that these perspectives can offer.
Another lens that can be used to view science and technology is the cyborg theory. Further developed by theorist Donna Haraway, cyborg theory is a framework that serves to move between a feminist and biomedical approach to science, technology, and the body. This theory can be understood using the example of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for menopausal cisgender women. The feminist perspective on menopause posits that menopause is a natural process in women's lives and thus should occur without interventions that are unnecessary or view it as something that must be cured. The biomedical framework believes that HRT has the capability to restore all that is lost due to menopause; it views menopausal women as lacking something, withering away, weak, and having lost femininity (Leng 1996).
Cyborg theory posits that there is no natural woman's body. Since there is no universal “woman” experience the natural category of woman does not exist and instead there is a “fractured” culmination of experiences (Sismondo 2010). Cyborg theory posits that feminism should embrace technology while being cautious of it. Since technology developed alongside masculinity, it has been infused with patriarchal values. However, technology also has the capabilities to help people with their gender embodiments in new ways and create new subjectivities (Sismondo 2010 & Leng 1996).
“At the same time, which background assumptions people choose, and which ones they choose to question will be strongly informed by social values.”
Sergio Sismondo 2010
What is biotechnology?
The definition of biotechnology is as vast and malleable as the definition of the technology itself. The definitions of biotechnology depend on the actual biotechnological product. Professor Meika Loe describes biotechnology as a part of the arsenal of tools that have been used to “define, construct, inhibit and enhance sexual bodies” (Loe 2001). The medical models often used and upheld the male cisgender body as the ‘model organism’ during the inception of America, this way the white man was regarded as the model citizen (Kimmel 2018). When the woman’s body started to become researched, it was categorized as “unknowable”. Following that era during the 19th and 20th centuries, doctors and the medical complex began finding pathologies in women and men's bodies and thus began the “techno-fix” era of human development that I would argue has not yet ended (Loe 2001).
Another application of the word biotechnology can be found in the field of food production with the massive debate that occurred around the world in response to the widespread use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) (Jasanoff 2012). With the integration of GMOs into the mass market, countries have engaged in the intense debate regarding their regulation and distribution. Jasanoff delves into the ways that regulation, reasoning, and uncertainty all play a role in the response from the common public. The integration of biotechnologies into America, Britain, and Germany saw different responses from the state and the public. America had taken a route that relied heavily on constructed expertise and high-level authority figures filling the roles of judgment. Britain had incorporated public debate into the decisions made about GMOs and other biotechnologies and created legislation as well as an advisory committee to discuss the problem. Germany’s legislation was delayed after they decided there needed to be more discussion about the effects of GMOs and biotechnology on the people and environment. However, despite the delays and newly-created committees, GMOs were released into the public market (2012).
Jasanoff discussed how the regulation of uncertainty is necessary when introducing new technologies into the public sphere. The regulation of uncertainty was abundantly apparent in these three states’ responses to biotechnology as the US attempted to downplay the risk and uncertainty from the beginning. However, all three states eventually decided that the risk and uncertainty were worth the product’s potential to increase supply and enhance production. The regulation also extends to the public resistance to biotechnology. The state determines which means citizens are allowed to protest thus regulating our ability to voice concern. This is when scientific experts are introduced into the discussion. Their expertise may be based on science but they overshadow any common public voice. Regulation turns knowledge into a cultural resource which then molds the common epistemology. The public attempts to create knowledge and fill gaps that the state leaves, especially in the face of disasters. Cultural knowledge is then used to form a contract between society (common public) and the state where they both agree to the costs, risks, and benefits.
The risk associated with GMOs were discussed and determined to be worth the possible injuries that could occur now or later. For biotechnologies related to the management of sexualities and gender, as discussed by Loe, the impacts and risks are discussed, made apparent, and still adopted into mainstream medicine and culture.
The relationship between the body and medical technologies has been transformed. Since every aspect of our lives has been molded into a data point, the medical establishment entrenched in capitalism has also commodified almost every aspect of our body and health. The relationship between technology and the body have become even more entrenched in the idea of managing the pathologies that were ascribed to women and men's bodies. Technology behaves as both a mode of exploring and expanding subjectivities but it is also a means of conducting passive surveillance on subjects.
Biotechnology is subjected to much scrutiny, as many tools of subjectivity have been. The medical complex presents biotechnology as both a dire necessity and casual treatment. In the case of HRT, the beginnings of its advertisement as a menopause treatment are laced in misogyny and biomedical theorizing (Leng 1996).
Menopausal women have been described as withering away, deficient, and lacking femininity. HRT was described as being able to restore these women back to their natural selves, return their femininity, and stabilize their emotions. When we look at advertisements both old and contemporary we see that the imagery of the ideal menopausal woman informs the imagery and language used in these advertisements.
CITATIONS
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sex/gender: Biology in a social world. Routledge, 2012.
Jasanoff, Sheila. “Product, Process, or Programme: three cultures and the regulation of biotechnology” Science and public reason. Routledge, 2012, 23-38.
Kimmel, Michael. Manhood in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017.
Leng, Kwok Wei. "On menopause and cyborgs: or, towards a feminist cyborg politics of menopause." Body & society 2.3 (1996): 33-52.
Loe, Meika. "Fixing broken masculinity: Viagra as a technology for the production of gender and sexuality." Sexuality and culture 5.3 (2001): 97-125.
Sismondo, Sergio. An introduction to science and technology studies. Vol. 1. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.
VIAGRA
Viagra as biotechnology falls under the understanding of biotechnology as a tool used to enhance or transform the body. Viagra is marketed to treat erectile dysfunction and we will see in the following media that it is marketed as a tool for better sex life. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is defined as the “inability to attain or maintain a penile erection sufficient for successful vaginal intercourse” (Vlachopoulos 2015). The causes range from cardiovascular disease, inadequate blood flow, surgically induced ED, or trauma. ED causes distress to the patient in areas of life that include intimacy with a partner, self-esteem, and general quality of life (Vlachopoulos 2015).
Pfizer defines erectile dysfunction as “when a man has difficulty getting an erection or keeping it long enough for sex...It happens when not enough blood flows to the penis, preventing an erection” (Pfizer). Pfizer’s website continues on to state that diseases associated with erectile dysfunction include high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and diabetes (Pfizer).
These definitions do not stray far from each other. Pfizer has two versions of the Viagra website, one for consumers and one for doctors. The consumer’s site suggests discussing your symptoms with your doctor and provides helpful tips on starting the conversation with your doctor.
The definitions of erectile dysfunction center around sex with a vagina and sex to completion. It may not be the job of a medical doctor to provide other ways of engaging in fulfilling sexual encounters but the medical literature as well as Pfizer, the drug company, clearly place emphasis on both cis heterosexual sex as well as vaginal penetration. Viagra is just one tool used by doctors to restore manhood that would be lacking because of the inability to engage in vaginal intercourse. Having sex with a (woman) vagina is just one important marker of fulfilled manhood thus being unable to is a mark of failed manhood (Loe 2001).
Citations
Loe, Meika. "Fixing broken masculinity: Viagra as a technology for the production of gender and sexuality." Sexuality and culture 5.3 (2001): 97-125.
Pfizer. (n.d.). ABOUT ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION (ED). Retrieved December 08, 2020, from https://www.viagra.com/aboutED
Vlachopoulos C. (2015) Definition and Assessment of Erectile Dysfunction. In: Viigimaa M., Vlachopoulos C., Doumas M. (eds) Erectile Dysfunction in Hypertension and Cardiovascular Disease. Springer, Cham. https://doi- org.ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu/10.1007/978-3-319-08272-1_1
