A theme running through the readings this week is how identities are forged, represented, negotiated, and contested through and with the digital technology we use. Despite the anonymity one might enjoy in certain spaces on the internet, as we know from reading Nakamura, Hayles and Haraway, our bodies matter. Technologies can be used to subvert power structures and inequality, though more often digital media is used to amplify and reproduce them.
Loza describes how the #FemFuture initiative and its defenders silenced the women of color who have used platforms such as Twitter to call attention to their exclusion and to the ways they experience patriarchy differently from the middle / upper middle class white women who have powerful positions as bloggers and pundits in online feminist movements. When Black scientist and writer DNLee wrote a blog post about her experience being demeaned for her gender and race in an email exchange, Scientific American removed her blog post — ostensibly to “verify” facts, but a Tweet from Sci Am’s editor said that the post was “not appropriate for this area.” That justification makes little sense, given, as Hess from Slate writes “Lee’s blog is specifically dedicated to diversity issues; the business of how science is made, disseminated, and funded is crucial to its very existence.”
Many are using the internet to unite, heal, and raise awareness (the women using #NotYourAsianSidekick and #SolidarityIsForWhiteWomen, for example). But most of the examples in the readings demonstrate how digital media is used to entrench oppression.
Citing Nguyen, Loza writes: Feminists of the digital age must refuse the nostalgic discourse of authentic selves, of natural bodies, of fixed communities and instead attend to the “structures and relations that produce different kinds of subjects in position with different kinds of technologies” (Nguyen 2003, 302).
Haraway, in Cyborg Feminism (1991) asks a similar question: What kind of politics could embrace partial, contradictory, permanently unclosed constructions of personal and collective selves and still be faithful, effective, and ironically socialist-feminist?
Provocation: The readings this week have shown us many non-examples of the quotes above. What does the above look like in practice? What examples that you’ve come across demonstrate how digital interactions can build effective coalitions across identity groups that go beyond the “add-and-stir” model of diversity (Bailey, 2011)? How can we recognize, embrace, and attend to the role of intersectionality in our teaching and scholarship with digital media?
Ha! I see that we have asked similar questions.
To answer your last one, when I am designing syllabi, I always make sure that the readings are diverse and feature works from writers of many different racial, gendered, socio-economic backgrounds. I also bring in current events so that my students are up to date on the societal gains or loses being made in each arena, and the intersectional legacies that result.
Yes! Being intentional about discussing current events would be a great way to bring all of this in to a classroom. I think when I go teach the teacher prep students at Hunter next year, I am going to make space for those conversations. Like you said, having a diverse syllabus is also crucial. I’ve been noticing on Facebook that people have been creating and posting “syllabi” related to various current events — ie; a Ferguson syllabus, a Melissa Harris-Perry syllabus. It would be great to design a class flexible enough to accommodate connections to what’s going on in the here and now as related to intersectionality.
I think the discussion of syllabi is critical in the “how do we enact intersectionality” question. Part of this involves looking at the tactics even of these diverse articles– journals about other academic content (DNLee SciAm) or specialized content (Moyza Bailey JDH), blog posts geared toward specific audiences (Susana Loza Ada) or personal blog posts (Amelia Abreu), news articles (Amanda Filipacchi NYTimes) or advocacy on activist sites (femtechnet) or subsets of larger bodies (Wikimedia Gender Gap). Synthesizing these sources and advocating for the veracity of such diverse sources seems like a critical step. I must admit that I responded better to some of these sources than others, but presenting the array is really important.
Curricula are such a huge part of what we learn in grad school and I do think it’s important to provide the resources to shake things up — and not in a purely “add-and-stir” way. Part of the integration of various forms may have to do with giving teachers an opportunity to teach things they don’t know well. Perhaps part of the slowness to change curricula comes from a need to follow your own teachers to some degree in their methods or materials in order to have mentorship.
I have a lot of ideas about how curricula work, but I need to think on it more. The articles that worked best for me presented some sense of potential in observing dissonances between materials.
Thanks Sara and Makeba for the posts!
-Jojo
Yes, Sara! The syllabi were one of my favorite parts of the MHP show. She always provided such thoughtful materials.
And I agree, JoJo, that curricula is very important. But I think a large part of the problem stems from this viral tweet:
“WHITE PRIVILEGE IS YOUR HISTORY BEING TAUGHT AS A CORE CLASS AND MINE BEING TAUGHT AS AN ELECTIVE” (M. Worthy).
Of course, the fallacy is that it is all our history. But America and the world still doesn’t acknowledge this fact, and that plays a large part in the issues regarding our educational system and what is deemed important.
Seconding this post!
Syllabus design is a highly political activity in that it is central to what and how things get presented, connected and contextualized. As such, intersectionality itself can be a really powerful theme in putting together a comprehensive (though never exhaustive) collection of texts and materials to provoke messiness.
This idea of organizing materials to produce “messy” yet generative intellectual thought when creating a syllabus is really interesting. I am definitely curious to hear about your methods in syllabus design. Do you think it’s possible that students can contribute to adding supplemental course material? or do you think there are ways to create set-up intersections between viewpoints and topics so that students can draw comparisons about different source material themselves? Definitely would like to hear more!
Teresa — Last week I gave a presentation about connections between computer science and social justice and came up with a format which I think was useful for exploring multiple viewpoints, and which might lend itself to conversations about intersectionality. I called it a “museum” on the topic, and had groupings of “exhibits” which were comprised of images (with captions), screenshots, games, articles and photos, all loosely based on one aspect of the topic. For example, one exhibit had photos and articles which looked at CS and gender from multiple angles, another one was about digital activism and racial justice, another one about privacy. I gave groups of participants exhibits, and asked them to describe and interpret them for the rest of the group. I then asked participants if they were going to add an exhibit to the CS and SJ museum, what they would add and why.
The Lozan reading really blew my mind. It brings out a deeply uncomfortable but critical discussion that doesn’t get exposed too often. Its not a polite subject and in order to confront it, many people are going to feel their toes are being stepped on.
I grew up in the 70’s when feminism became mainstream. Some of the issues that women were vocal about; such as equal pay or the right to perform the jobs one wants, I think are across the board issues, but some of the other issues and iterations of feminism are not all encompassing. I do believe that White women have a one size fits all view of feminism. So much so, that I have hesitated to call my self one even as I try to be highly actualized as a woman. I have no desire to do anything the way a man does, I merely wish to be seen and heard and valued both for my potential as well as my accomplishments on all fronts (including as a wife and mother). I often feel, although I could be wrong, that the White feminist agenda uses men and their achievements as the metric for how we enact our lives. That is not a metric that works for me.
As an African American women and as the descendent of slaves, I feel that Black women have been fighting to be seen as wholly FEMALE. Our sense of empowerment has at times been seen as too strong and/or dominant which some feminists love, but it doesn’t allow for the softer side of womanhood which I also love , enjoy, and feel is part of the totality of the experience.
Has taking the struggle into cyber space changed the diatribe? There are a lot of ugly wars born of disagreement but my hope is that there is room for the lived experiences of various groups. I think that in our quest for tolerance, we might be breeding a new form of intolerance. We all have the power to “post” our opinions, which can lead to less listening and understanding. I’m hoping also that as Suey Park stated, People understand that feminism is not a fad. The movement is and has been on going. Only the look of it and the names have changed.
Love that you use your syllabus to address these issues Makeba. I do the same. I agree with Sakina that Syllabi are extremely political.
“…the White feminist agenda uses men and their achievements as the metric for how we enact our lives. That is not a metric that works for me.”
I relate this idea to the “Lean In” phenomenon which provides a very singular view of what feminism should be, and really wasn’t written with intersectionality in mind (from what I could tell… I have only read excerpts of it…)