Skip to main content
Log in

Theorizing Feminist Tinkering with Science Methodologies

  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, I combine feminist, decolonial scholar María Lugones’ theory on playfulness and world-traveling with feminist science studies scholar Deboleena Roy’s work along with some other core feminist science studies concepts to define feminist tinkering as an explicitly politically motivated “playing” with the epistemic power of science. I lay out three concepts integral to feminist tinkering—playfulness, hands-on engagement, and iterative experimentation. I contrast these definitions with those driving a mainstream embrace of tinkering, to caution against assuming that tinkering itself automatically creates a better, more just science practice. By tinkering with ideas from feminist science studies, decolonial studies, and popular activism together, I suggest tinkering as a feminist methodology towards rethinking concepts of the knower, objects of study, and their relationship. This approach to tinkering can be employed in formal and informal STEM education settings as a way of doing research differently.

Résumé

Dans cet article, j’associe la théorie de la spécialiste du féminisme décolonial María Lugones, qui porte sur le comportement ludique et les pèlerinages, au travail de la chercheure en sciences sociales féministes Deboleena Roy, ainsi qu’à d’autres concepts clés issus du même domaine, afin de définir le bricolage féministe comme un moyen, explicitement motivé à des fins politiques, de « jouer » avec le pouvoir épistémique de la science. Je présente trois concepts essentiels au bricolage féministe: l’attitude ludique, la participation active et pratique, et l’expérimentation itérative. Je compare ces définitions à celles qui sous-tendent un bricolage conventionnel, en guise de mise en garde contre l’idée reçue voulant que ce bricolage constitue automatiquement à lui seul une pratique scientifique à la fois meilleure et plus juste. Je propose également d’utiliser le bricolage de concepts issus des études scientifiques féministes, des études décoloniales et du militantisme populaire pour arriver à une méthodologie féministe visant à revoir les concepts de connaisseur du domaine et d’objets d’étude, ainsi que leur corrélation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barad, Karen. 2001. “Scientific Literacy -> Agential Literacy = (Learning + Doing) Science Responsibly.” In Feminist Science Studies: A New Generation, edited by Maralee Mayberry, Banu Subramaniam, and Lisa H. Weasel, 226–47. Psychology Press.

  • Barad, Karen. 2007. Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke university Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=H41WUfTU2CMC&oi=fnd&pg=PT7&dq=barad+meeting+the+universe&ots=MHV89xrRFU&sig=nTFNWB6peEjPomsgveXTCW8ZswQ.

  • Barad, Karen. 2010. “Quantum Entanglements and Hauntological Relations of Inheritance: Dis/Continuities, Spacetime Enfoldings, and Justice-to-Come.” Derrida Today 3 (2): 240–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubner, Stephen J. 2009. How Much Do Protests Matter? A Freakonomics Quorum.” Freakonomics (blog). August 20, 2009. http://freakonomics.com/2009/08/20/do-protests-matter-a-freakonomics-quorum/.

  • Dunbar-Hester, C. 2014. Low power to the people: Pirates, protest, and politics in FM radio activism. MIT Press.

  • Haraway, Donna. 1988. “Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.” Feminist Studies, 575–599.

  • Haraway, Donna Jeanne. 2008. When Species Meet. Vol. 224. U of Minnesota Press.

  • Harding, Sandra. 2006. Science and Social Inequality: Feminist and Postcolonial Issues. University of Illinois Press.

  • Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1983. “A Feeling for the Organism.” The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lather, Patti. 2012. Getting Lost: Feminist Efforts toward a Double (d) Science. Suny Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=2OuYvbD9bQsC&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=lather+getting+lost&ots=zguOTRinmI&sig=aYzyz9kP3-it-wtsUpVKiqV6qJo.

  • Lugones, Maria. 1987. “Playfulness,‘World’-Travelling, and Loving Perception.” Hypatia 2 (2): 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Povinelli, Elizabeth A. 2016. Geontologies: A Requiem to Late Liberalism. Duke University Press.

  • Puig de la Bellacasa, María. 2009. “Touching Technologies, Touching Visions. The Reclaiming of Sensorial Experience and the Politics of Speculative Thinking.” Subjectivity 28 (1): 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1057/sub.2009.17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Deboleena. 2004. “Feminist Theory in Science: Working Toward a Practical Transformation.” Hypatia 19 (1): 255–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2004.tb01277.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Deboleena. 2012. “Feminist Approaches to Inquiry in the Natural Sciences: Practices for the Lab.” In Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis, edited by Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber, 313–30. Los Angeles: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1976. “Translator’s Preface.” Of Grammatology 24.

  • Willey, Angela. 2016a. “Biopossibility: A Queer Feminist Materialist Science Studies Manifesto, with Special Reference to the Question of Monogamous Behavior.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 41 (3): 553–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willey, Angela. 2016b. Undoing Monogamy: The Politics of Science and the Possibilities of Biology. Duke University Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thank you to my UC Davis WMS 201: Feminist Science and Democracy class for reading an early draft of this article and spending time tinkering with ideas of science and democracy. Thank you to the organizers and participants of the May 2018 Toward Decolonial Feminisms conference at Penn State for giving me a venue to work on my arguments on Lugones’ playfulness and world-traveling and tinkering. Specific thanks to María Lugones for engaging with my presentation. And of course thank you to anonymous reviewers and the editors of this special issue who provided valuable feedback throughout the revision process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara Giordano.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Giordano, S. Theorizing Feminist Tinkering with Science Methodologies. Can. J. Sci. Math. Techn. Educ. 18, 222–231 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-018-0027-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-018-0027-y

Keywords

Navigation