Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nicht-menschlich ist auch Gender

  • HAUPTBEITRAG
  • NICHT-MENSCHLICH IST AUCH GENDER
  • Published:
Informatik-Spektrum Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die epistemologischen und ontologischen Auffassungen von Genderforschung und Informatik unterscheiden sich wesentlich. In der Informatik besteht die Welt aus Objekten, die aufgrund von Ähnlichkeiten und ihren Beziehungen untereinander klassifiziert werden. In der Genderforschung werden die Unterschiedlichkeiten respektiert. Die Anerkennung von Interaktion und deren Materialität und die Anerkennung der Handlungsfähigkeit menschlicher und nicht-menschlicher Aktoren in beiden Disziplinen kann zu einer Kooperation führen. Einer Kooperation darüber, wie man verantwortungsvolles Handeln von Menschen in einer unfassbar komplexen Welt gestaltet, in der auch nicht-menschliche Aktoren ihre Rolle spielen.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Akrich M (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker WE, Law J (eds) Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change. The MIT Press, London, pp 205–224

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allhutter D (2011) Mind Scripting: A Method for Deconstructive Design Science, Technology & Human Values. http://sth.sagepub.com, last access: 15.12.2012

  3. Barad K (1998) Getting real: technoscientific practices and the materialization of reality. differences 10:87–128

    Google Scholar 

  4. Barad K (2000) Agential realism. In: Code L (ed) Encyclopedia of feminist theories. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barad K (2003) Posthumanist performativity: toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. J Women Culture Soc 28(3):801–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barad K (2007) Meeting the universe halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  7. Butler (1990) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge, New York

  8. Booch G (1991) Object oriented design, with applications. Benjamin/Cummings, Redwood City

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bowker GC, Star SL (1996) How things (actor-net)work: classification, magic and the ubiquity of standards. http://www.sis.pitt.edu/∼gbowker/actnet.html, last access: 15.12.2012

  10. Clement A, Besselaar PVd (1993) A retrospective look at PDProjects. CACM 36(4):29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Code L (1993) Taking subjectivity in account. In: Alcoff L, Potter E (eds) Feminist epistemologies. Routledge, New York, pp 15–48

    Google Scholar 

  12. Crutzen CKM (2003) ICT-representations as transformative critical rooms. In: Kreutzner G, Schelhowe H (eds) Agents of change: virtuality, gender, and the challenge to the traditional university. Opladen, pp 87–106

  13. Crutzen CKM, Hein HW (2009) Invisibility and visibility; the shadows of the artificial intelligence. In: Vallverdu J, Casacuberta D (eds) Handbook of research on synthetic emotions and sociable robotics: new applications in affective computing and artificial intelligence. IGI-Global, pp 472–500

  14. Fraser N, Nicholson LJ (1990) Social criticism without philosophy: an encounter between feminism and postmodernism. In: Nicholson LJ (ed) Feminism/postmodernism. Routledge, London, pp 19–38

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fox Keller E (1985) Reflections on gender and science. Yale University, Vail-Ballou, Binghamton, NY

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fox Keller E (2007) A clash of two cultures. Nature 445(7128):603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Götschel H (2008) Physik: gender goes physical – Geschlechterverhältnisse, Geschlechtervorstellungen und die Erscheinungen der unbelebten Natur. In: Becker R, Kortendiek B (Hrsg) Handbuch Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, S 834–842

  18. Haraway DJ (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies 14(3):575–599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Haraway DJ (1991) A cyborg manifesto: science, technology and social-feminism in the late twentieth century. In: Haraway DJ (1991) Simians, cyborgs, and women. The reinvention of nature. Free Association Books, London, pp 149–181

    Google Scholar 

  20. Heidegger M (1996) Die Technik und die Kehre, 9. Aufl. Günther Neske, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hoare CAR (1972) Notes on data structuring. In: Dahl OJ, Dijkstra RW, Hoare CAR (eds) Structured programming. APIC studies in data processing No 8. Academic Press, London, pp 83–174

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hofmann J (1999) Writers, texts and writing acts: gendered user images in word processing software. In: MacKenzie D, Wajcman J (eds) The social shaping of technology, 2nd edn. Buckingham, pp 222–243

  23. Holloway CM (1995) ACM SIGSOFT software engineering notes archive 20(2):20–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Introna LD (2007) Towards a post-human intra-actional account of sociotechnical agency (and morality). http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/posthuman.pdf, last access: 15.12.2012

  25. Irni S (2010) Ageing Apparatuses at Work, Transdisciplinary Negotiations of Sex, Age and Materiality Dissertation, Åbo Akademi University. http://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/61786/irni_sari.pdf, last access: 15.12.2012

  26. Kling R (1993) Organizational Analysis in Computer Science. Working Paper #AIM-046, University of California: Irvine Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations and Department of Information and Computer Science. www.crito.uci.edu/research-archives/pdf/aim-046.pdf, last access: 15.12.2012

  27. Kurzweil R (2006) Reinventing humanity: the future of machine-human intelligence. Futurist 40(2):39–46

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Latour B (1996) On actor-network theory. A few clarifications. Soziale Welt 47:369–381

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lawley EL (1993) Computers and the Communication of Gender. www.itcs.com/elawley/gender.html, last access: 15.12.2012

  30. Lorde A (1984) The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. Extract from ‘Sister Outsider’, Trumansburg: Crossing Press:110–113. Benutzte Version in Evans M (ed) (1994) The woman question. 2nd edn. SAGE Publications, London, pp 366–368

    Google Scholar 

  31. Nahuis R, Van Lente H (2008) Where are the politics? Perspectives on democracy and technology. Sci Technol Hum Values 33:559–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schelhowe H (2005) Interaktionen – Gender Studies und die Informatik. In: Kahlert H, Thiessen B, Weller I (Hrsg) Quer denken Strukturen verändern. Gender Studies zwischen Disziplinen. VS-Verlag Wiesbaden, S 203–220. http://dimeb.informatik.uni-bremen.de/documents/Schelhowe_Quer_denken.pdf, letzter Zugriff: 15.12.2012

  33. Schinzel B (2001) Deutungen der Informatik als Ingenieurwissenschaft. Z Kommunikationsökol 3:27–41. http://www.careerbench.uni-freiburg.de/cms/fileadmin/publikationen/online-publikationen/deutung.pdf, letzter Zugriff: 15.12.2012

  34. Schmitz S (2004) Wie kommt das Geschlecht ins Gehirn? Über den Geschlechterdeterminismus in der Hirnforschung und Ansätze zu seiner Dekonstruktion. In: Forum Wissenschaft. http://www.bdwi.de/forum/archiv/uebersicht/97754.html, letzter Zugriff: 15.12.2012

  35. Sefyrin J (2009) Do you work on IT or what? – Configurations of Heterogeneous Actors in Information Systems Design. Proceedings 5th European Symposium on Gender & ICT. Digital Cultures:Participation – Empowerment – Diversity, University of Bremen. http://www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/soteg/gict2009/proceedings/GICT2009_Sefyrin.pdf, last access: 15.12.2012

  36. Shaw M (1984) Abstraction techniques in modern programming languages. IEEE Softw 1(4):10–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Simon J (2012) Epistemic responsibility in entangled socio-technical systems. In: Dodig-Crnkovic G, Rotolo A, Sartor G, Simon J, Smith C (eds) Social computing, social cognition, social networks and multiagent systems social turn – SNAMAS 2012, AISB/IACAP World Congress 2012, Birmingham (UK), pp 56–60

  38. Soegaard M (2006) Object Orientation Redefined – From abstract to direct objects and toward a more understandable approach to understanding. www.interaction-design.org/mads/articles/object_orientation_redefined.html, last access: 15.12.2012

  39. Suchman LA (1994a) Working relations of technology production and use. Comput Support Coop Work (CSCW) 2(1–2):21–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Suchman LA (1994b) Do categories have politics? The language/actionperspective reconsidered. Comput Support Coop Work (CSCW) 2(3):177–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Suchman LA (2002) Located accountabilities in technology production. Scand J Inf Syst 14(2):91–105

    Google Scholar 

  42. Suchman LA (2005) Agencies in Technology Design: Feminist Reconfigurations. http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/research/publications/papers/suchman-agenciestechnodesign.pdf, last access: 15.12.2012

  43. Suchman LA (2007) Human-machine reconfigurations – plans and situated actions, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press

  44. Velden MVd (2009) Design for a common world: on ethical agency and cognitive justice. Ethics Inf Technol 11(1):37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Van Oost E (2003) Materialized gender: how shavers configure the user’s femininity and masculinity. In: Oudshoorn N, Pinch T (eds) How users matter, the co-construction of users and technologies. MIT Press, Cambridge (MA), pp 193–208

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wajcman J (2002) Gender in der Technologieforschung. In: Pasero U, Gottburgsen A (Hrsg) Wie natürlich ist Geschlecht? – Gender und die Konstruktion von Natur und Technik. Westdeutscher Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp 270–289

    Google Scholar 

  47. Weber J (2005) Helpless machines and true loving care givers: a feminist critique of recent trends in human-robot interaction. J Inf Commun Ethics Soc 3(4):209–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Voerendaal, Niederlande

    Cecile K. M. Crutzen

Authors
  1. Cecile K. M. Crutzen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cecile K. M. Crutzen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Crutzen, C. Nicht-menschlich ist auch Gender. Informatik Spektrum 36, 309–318 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-013-0697-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-013-0697-9

Search

Navigation