![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
the_fantastic_ms_foxfrom http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/4521
I like the idea of the IEET, but I'm starting to dislike the execution. At least by the more established authours.
I am reblogging things from the IEET, but I'm finding it a hard thing to sell to progressive women.
First
I think a wider spectrum of people would be more motivated to write if there was a clearer process for submitting articles. Or highlighted calls for submissions. Or criteria on which articles would be accepted. Or an explanation of what's in it for the authour.
Once you have a CFS together, do outreach. Field it to social science departments. Find professors who teach on the sociology or identity implications of science-fiction.
Second:
Many women interested in progressive transhumanist thought (as opposed to those of a more more anarcho-capitalist/Randist bent) come at it from a postmodern feminist perspective. Here, identities, including gender, are fragmented and formed out of overlapping categories and social positions.
Sorry to be the one to tell you, but this "outreach" article is going to make it harder, not easier, to reach them.
(a) Above, "Women" are presented as a category separate from nationality, queer status, or politics. No mention is made of age, disability or race, which are also factors that bear addressing at the IEET. Nor is mention made of gender in relation to these. A lot of the transhumanist-leaning women I know don't see "women" as a single-variable demographic (or at least one with no universal experience), and they will ignore any such outreach. Pick an intersection and approach that.
Example specific demographics/issues:
--- women with, or who have survived breast cancer in relation to medical imaging, prostheses, gene testing, cosmetic vs reconstructive medicine
---women with disabilities in relation to genetic screening, prostheses, reproductive control and transportation
---immigrant women in relation to telepresence, transportation, global governance, biometric identification
(b) Gender is represented as (i) binary (consisting of two genders, full stop), (ii) obvious (you will only accept feedback from women - how do you know who is a woman online? Do I have to identify myself? What if I'd rather people in the fora didn't know my gender?), and (iii) reduceable to chromosomes.
With this, we lose the gender studies set, and the technology/women's-studies set. We alienate butches, genderqueers, intersexed women, intersexed men, transsexual women, transsexual men, bigendered people, as well as the cisgendered women who are dating, raising, or hanging out with the aforementioned. Which is a shame, because I see a lot of transhuman interest from just these T* demographics.
Having tried to interest progressive women in this site, they have told me that they'd rather start up a new one, or that I *could* write here, but it would be more of an act of defiance. Some of their language has not been something I feel comfortable repeating here.
Common themes:
- Less interested in Aritificial Intelligence than in anthropogenic climate change, infectious disease and *current legislation* surrounding somatic rights
- are living somatic rights struggles (abortion, transition, surrogacy, sex-work) and wonder whether view *some* of the IEET writers are armchair technicians who would rather talk theory than examine practice
- look at the writers and see a bunch of unusually similar looking dudes, and wonder "so, do they all know each-other from a sunscreen party or what?"
If you want help doing outreach to a marginalized and underrepresented demographic, I recommend first analyzing why you want to do it, and then contacting relevant groups of these women to see what you can do for them, not the reverse. Finding "guest bloggers" is a good start. As mentioned in comments above, people are going to be more motivated to share something they were going to write anyway than to write something for you.
Also, don't ask "Is there some reason in particular why you choose to write so much less about the issues of ethics and emerging technologies than do your male counterparts?"
We are writing, we're just not writing here... yet
I like the idea of the IEET, but I'm starting to dislike the execution. At least by the more established authours.
I am reblogging things from the IEET, but I'm finding it a hard thing to sell to progressive women.
First
I think a wider spectrum of people would be more motivated to write if there was a clearer process for submitting articles. Or highlighted calls for submissions. Or criteria on which articles would be accepted. Or an explanation of what's in it for the authour.
Once you have a CFS together, do outreach. Field it to social science departments. Find professors who teach on the sociology or identity implications of science-fiction.
Second:
Many women interested in progressive transhumanist thought (as opposed to those of a more more anarcho-capitalist/Randist bent) come at it from a postmodern feminist perspective. Here, identities, including gender, are fragmented and formed out of overlapping categories and social positions.
Sorry to be the one to tell you, but this "outreach" article is going to make it harder, not easier, to reach them.
(a) Above, "Women" are presented as a category separate from nationality, queer status, or politics. No mention is made of age, disability or race, which are also factors that bear addressing at the IEET. Nor is mention made of gender in relation to these. A lot of the transhumanist-leaning women I know don't see "women" as a single-variable demographic (or at least one with no universal experience), and they will ignore any such outreach. Pick an intersection and approach that.
Example specific demographics/issues:
--- women with, or who have survived breast cancer in relation to medical imaging, prostheses, gene testing, cosmetic vs reconstructive medicine
---women with disabilities in relation to genetic screening, prostheses, reproductive control and transportation
---immigrant women in relation to telepresence, transportation, global governance, biometric identification
(b) Gender is represented as (i) binary (consisting of two genders, full stop), (ii) obvious (you will only accept feedback from women - how do you know who is a woman online? Do I have to identify myself? What if I'd rather people in the fora didn't know my gender?), and (iii) reduceable to chromosomes.
With this, we lose the gender studies set, and the technology/women's-studies set. We alienate butches, genderqueers, intersexed women, intersexed men, transsexual women, transsexual men, bigendered people, as well as the cisgendered women who are dating, raising, or hanging out with the aforementioned. Which is a shame, because I see a lot of transhuman interest from just these T* demographics.
Having tried to interest progressive women in this site, they have told me that they'd rather start up a new one, or that I *could* write here, but it would be more of an act of defiance. Some of their language has not been something I feel comfortable repeating here.
Common themes:
- Less interested in Aritificial Intelligence than in anthropogenic climate change, infectious disease and *current legislation* surrounding somatic rights
- are living somatic rights struggles (abortion, transition, surrogacy, sex-work) and wonder whether view *some* of the IEET writers are armchair technicians who would rather talk theory than examine practice
- look at the writers and see a bunch of unusually similar looking dudes, and wonder "so, do they all know each-other from a sunscreen party or what?"
If you want help doing outreach to a marginalized and underrepresented demographic, I recommend first analyzing why you want to do it, and then contacting relevant groups of these women to see what you can do for them, not the reverse. Finding "guest bloggers" is a good start. As mentioned in comments above, people are going to be more motivated to share something they were going to write anyway than to write something for you.
Also, don't ask "Is there some reason in particular why you choose to write so much less about the issues of ethics and emerging technologies than do your male counterparts?"
We are writing, we're just not writing here... yet