Politics by Other Means: Feminism and Mainstream Science Studies

Abstract

Abstract: This paper explores the fraught relationship between feminist and mainstream science and technology studies (STS). The diverse contributions of feminist and mainstream authors, particularly actor-network theorists, are outlined. It is argued these two fields share many common themes, but that, while feminists have begun to integrate the insights of mainstream STS into their work, mainstream STS continues to treat feminist work and issues of inequality as a separate field of enquiry. Persistent tensions between feminist and mainstream STS are discussed, and some authors' recent attempts at integration are examined. It is suggested greater cross-fertilization would substantially improve both feminist and mainstream studies of science and technology. Resume: Cet article explore la relation souvent tendue entre les etudes feministes et les contributions au courant dominant dans le domaine de la science et de la technologie. Les multiples contributions des auteurs feministes et des auteurs qui incrivent dans la ligne du courant dominant, surtout celles des theoriciens qui s'interessent aux analyses acteur-reseau, sont presentees. On s'efforce de demontrer que ces champs d'etude partagent des themes communs. Cependant, alors que les feministes ont commence a integrer certains elements du courant dominant dans leurs analyses, les auteurs representant le courant dominant persistent encore a cantonnerl' analyse feministe et les themes d'inegalite dans un champ d'etude distinct. En plus d'examiner les tensions qui persistent entre ces deux approches, on presente aussi quelques tentatives recentes d'integration de ces analyses. L'auteure suggere qu'un plus grand croisement entre ces approches ameliorerait considerablement les etudes feministes de meme que les c ontributions au courant dominant. Introduction In the 'science wars,' a few natural scientists and other 'defenders' of science have argued a scientifically ignorant and political subversive movement, bent on destroying science, has arisen within the 'academic left' (e.g. Gross and Levitt, 1994; Koertge, 1998; Sokal, 1996, 1998). This charge has been brought against both contemporary mainstream science and technology studies (STS) scholars such as Harry Collins and Bruno Latour, and many prominent feminist epistemologists and analysts of science, such as Sandra Harding, Donna Haraway, and Evelyn Fox Keller. (2) It may seem ironic mainstream STSers and feminists are charged as co-conspirators, and feminist authors have attracted so much attention (however negative) from the defenders of science: several prominent feminist scholars have been arguing for some time mainstream STSers show comparatively little interest in feminist work, or in any kind of sustained political attack on science. In her latest book, Donna Haraway wishes that th e 'left' were really so unified! (Haraway, 1997: 283, note 17) and complains (not for the first time) about the dearth of references to STS in mainstream accounts: Either critical scholars in antiracist, feminist cultural studies of science and technology have not been clear enough about racial formation, gender-in-the-making, the forging of class, and the discursive production of sexuality through the constitutive practices of technoscience production themselves, or the science studies scholars aren't reading or listening -- or both.... It is past time to end the failure of mainstream and oppositional science studies scholars to engage each other's work. Immodestly, I think the failure to engage has not been symmetrical (Haraway, 1997: 35; emphasis in original). Not everyone agrees. In introducing a volume of essays on gender and technology, one which draws on both feminist and mainstream STS, Rosalind Gill and Keith Grint claim We no longer need to argue the case the relations between gender and technology deserve attention; argument has been won (Gill and Grint, 1995: 2). …