Gender and technology

Annual Review of Anthropology

Volumn 36, Issue , 2007, Pages 37-53

  Bray, Francesca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Coproduction; Domestication; Globalization; Skills; Technoscience

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOLOGY; DOMESTICATION; GENDER; GLOBALIZATION; INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH;

EID: 35948948344     PISSN: 00846570     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094328     Document Type: Review

References (141)

1. Akrich M. 1992. The description of technical objects. See Bijker & Law 1992, pp. 205-24
2. Akrich M. 1993. A gazogene in Costa Rica: an experiment in techno-sociology. See Lemonnier 1993, pp. 289-337
3. Arnold D. 2005. Europe, technology, and colonialism in the twentieth century. Hist. Technol. 21:85-106
4. Arnold E, Faulkner W. 1985. Smothered by invention: the masculinity of technology. In Smothered by Invention: Technology in Women's Lives, ed. W Faulkner, E Arnold, pp. 18-50. London: Pluto
5. Axel BK. 2006. Anthropology and the new technologies of communication. Cult. Anthropol. 21:354-84
6. Berg AJ. 1997. Digital Feminism. Trondheim: Cent. Technol. Soc., Nor. Univ. Sci. Technol.
7. Bijker W, Hughes TP, Pinch T, eds. 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
8. Bijker W, Law J, eds. 1992. Shaping Technology/Building Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
9. Bowker GC, Star SL. 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
10. Bray F. 1997. Technology and Gender: Fabrics of Power in Late Imperial China. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
11. Bray F. 2003. Genetically modified foods: shared risk and global action. In Revising Risk: Health Inequalities and Shifting Perceptions of Danger and Blame, ed. BH Harthorn, L Oaks, pp. 185-207. Westport, CT: Praeger
12. Bucciarelli LL. 1994. Designing Engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
13. Butler J. 1993. Bodies that Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. New York. Routledge
14. Cockburn C. 1983. Brothers: Male Dominance and Technological Change. London: Pluto
15. Cockburn C. 1985. Machinery of Dominance: Women, Men and Technical Know-How. London: Pluto
16. Cockburn C, Ormrod S. 1993. Gender and Technology in the Making. London/Thousand Oaks: Sage
17. Collier SJ, Lakoff A. 2005. On regimes of living. See Ong & Collier 2005, pp. 22-39
18. Collier SJ, Ong A. 2005. Global assemblages, anthropological problems. See Ong & Collier 2005, pp. 3-31
19. Connell RW. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
20. Corea G, Klein D, Hanmer J, Holmes HB, Hoskins B, et al. 1985. Manmade Women: How New Reproductive Technologies Affect Women. London: Hutchinson
21. Cowan RS. 1983. More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. New York. Basic Books
22. Cowan RS. 1987. The consumption junction: a proposal for research strategies in the sociology of technology. See Bijker et al. 1987, pp. 261-80
23. Dant T. 2005. Materiality and Sociality. Maidenhead, UK: Open Univ. Press
24. Darbon S, ed. 2002. Pour une anthropologie des pratiques sportives. Propriétés formelles et rapport au corps dans le rugby a XV. Tech. et Cult. 39:1-27
25. Desrosiers S. 1997. Textes techniques, savoir-faire et messages codés dans les textiles des Andes. Tech. et Cult. 29:155-73
26. d'Onofrio S, Joulian F. 2006. Dire le savoir-faire: gestes, techniques et objets. Cab. Anthropol. Soc. 1:9-12
27. Downey GL. 1992. CAD/CAM saves the nation: toward an anthropology of technology. Knowl. Soc. Anthropol. Sci. Technol. 9:143-68
28. Downey GL. 1998. The machine in Me: An Anthropologist Sits among Computer Engineers. New York: Routledge
29. Downey GL, Dumit J, William S. 1995. Cyborg anthropology. Cult. Anthropol. 10:264-69
30. Escobar A. 1994. Welcome to Cyberia: notes on the anthropology of cyberculture. Curr. Anthropol. 35:211-31
31. Escobar A. 1999. After nature: steps to an antiessentialist political ecology. Curr. Anthropol. 40:1-30
32. Faulkner W. 2000. The power and the pleasure? A research agenda for "making gender stick" to engineers. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 25:87-119
33. Faulkner W. 2001. The technology question in feminism: a view from feminist technology studies. Women's Stud. Int. Forum 24:79-95
34. Faure-Rouesnel L. 2001. French anthropology and material culture. J. Mat. Cult. 6:237-47
35. Feenberg A. 1999. Questioning Technology. London: Routledge
36. Flitsch M. 2004. Der Kang. Eine Studie zur materiellen Alltagskultur bäuerlicher Gehöfte in der Manjurei. Wiesbaden, Germ.: Harrassowitz
37. Franklin S. 2005. Stem cells R us: emergent life forms and the global biological. See Ong & Collier 2005, pp. 59-78
38. Freeman C. 2001. Is local:global as feminine:masculine? Rethinking the gender of globalization. Signs 26:1007-37
39. Gansmo HJ. 2003. Limits of state feminism: chaotic translations of the "girls and computing" problem. See Lie 2003b, pp. 135-72
40. Geertz C. 1963. Agricultural Involution: the processes of ecological change in Indonesia. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
41. Gell A. 1992. The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology. In Anthropology, Art and Aesthetics, ed. J Coote, A Shelton, pp. 40-63. Oxford: Clarendon
42. Gero JM, Conkey MW, eds. 1991. Engenderihg Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Oxford: Blackwell
43. Goody J. 1971. Technology, Tradition and the State in Africa. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
44. Goody J. 1986. The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
45. Greenhalgh S. 2005. Globalization and population governance in China. See Ong & Collier 2005, pp. 354-72
46. Grint K, Gill R, eds. 1995. The Gender-Technology Relation. London: Taylor & Francis
47. Guille-Escuret G. 2003. Retour aux modes de production, sans contrôle philosophique. Tech. et Cult. 40:81-105
48. Hakken D. 1993. Computing and social change: new technology and workplace transformation, 1980-1990. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 22:107-32
49. Haraway D. 1991. Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, Cyborgs, and Women, pp. 183-201. New York: Routledge
50. Harding S. 1986. The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
51. Horowitz R, ed. 2001. Boys and their Toys? Masculinity, Class, and Technology in America. New York/London: Routledge
52. Horst H, Miller D. 2005. From kinship to link-up: cell phones and social networking in Jamaica. Curr. Anthropol. 46:755-88
53. Hubak M. 1996. The car as a cultural statement: car advertising as gendered socio-technical scripts. See Lie & Sørensen 1996, pp. 171-200
54. Hughes TP. 1983. Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society 1880-1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
55. Hughes TP. 1986. The seamless web: technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Soc. Stud. Sci. 16:281-92
56. Hugh-Jones C. 1979. From the Milk River: Spatial and Temporal Processes in Northwest Amazonia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
57. Ingold T. 2000. Of string bags and birds' nests: skill and the construction of artefacts. In The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill, pp. 349-61. London/New York: Routledge
58. Kaufman SR, Morgan LM. 2005. The anthropology of the beginnings and ends of life. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34:317-41
59. Kleif T, Faulkner W. 2003. "I'm no athlete but I can make this thing dance" - men's pleasures in technology. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 28:296-325
60. Kline R. 2003. Resisting consumer technology in rural America: the telephone and electrification. See Oudshoorn & Pinch 2003, pp. 51-66
61. Kramerae C, ed. 1988. Technology and Women's Voices: Keeping in Touch. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
62. Kroeber A, Kluckhohn C. 1952. Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
63. Kvande E. 1999. "In the belly of the beast": constructing femininities in engineering organizations. Eur. J. Women's Stud. 6:305-28
64. Lægran AS. 2003a. Escape vehicles? The Internet and the automobile in a local-global intersection. See Oudshoorn & Pinch 2003, pp. 81-100
65. Lægran AS. 2003b. Just another boys' room? Internet cafes as gendered technosocial spaces. See Lie 2003b, pp. 198-227
66. Lagesen VA. 2005. A cyber-feminist utopia? Perceptions of gender and computer science among Malaysian women computer science students. In Extreme make-over: the making of gender and computer science, pp. 155-94. PhD thesis, Cent. Technol. Soc., Nor. Univ. Sci. Technol.
67. Latour B. 1992. Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. See Bijker & Law 1992, pp. 225-57
68. Latour B. 1993. Ethnography of a "high-tech" case. See Lemonnier 2003, pp. 372-98
69. Latour B. 1996. Aramis, or the Love of Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
70. Law J. 1998. Machinic pleasures and interpellations. In Machines, Agency and Desire, ed. B Brenna, J Law, I Moser, pp. 23-49. Oslo: Cent. Technol. Cult., Univ. Oslo
71. Law J, Singleton V. 2000. Performing technology's stories: on social constructivism, performance, and performativity. Technol. Cult. 41:765-75
72. Lemonnier P. 1992. Elements for an Anthropology of Technology. Ann Arbor: Mus. Anthropol., Univ. Mich.
73. Lemonnier P, ed. 1993. Technological Choices. Transformations in Material Cultures since the Neolithic. London/New York: Routledge
74. Lemonnier P. 2004. Mythiques chaînes opératoires. Tech. et Cult. 43-44:25-43
75. Lerman NE, Mohun AP, Oldenziel R. 1997. The shoulders we stand on and the view from here: historiography and directions for research. Technol. Cult. 38:9-30
76. Lerman NE, Oldenziel R, Mohun AP, eds. 2003. Gender and Technology: A Reader. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press
77. Lie M. 2003a. Gender and ICT - new connections. See Lie 2003b, pp. 9-33
78. Lie M, ed. 2003b. He, She and IT Revisited: New Perspectives on Gender in the Information Society. Oslo: Gylendal
79. Lie M, Sørensen KH. 1996. Making technology our own? Domesticating technology into everyday life. Oslo: Scand. Univ. Press
80. Lohan M. 2000. Constructive tensions in feminist technology studies. Soc. Stud. Sci. 30:895-916
81. Lohan M. 2001. Men, masculinities and "mundane" technologies: the domestic telephone. In Virtual Gender: Technology, Consumption and Identity, ed. E Green, A Adam, pp. 189-205. London/New York: Routledge
82. Lohan M, Faulkner W. 2004. Masculinities and technologies: some introductory remarks. Men Mascul. 6:319-29
83. Mackenzie D, Wajcman J, eds. 1999. The Social Shaping of Technology. Maidenhead, UK: Open Univ. Press
84. MacKenzie M. 1991. Androgynous Objects: String Bags and Gender in Central New Guinea. Chur: Harwood Acad.
85. Mabias MC. 1993. Pottery techniques in India: technical variants and social choice. See Lemonnier 2003, pp. 157-80
86. Mahias MC. 2002. Le Barattage du Monde. Essais d'Anthropologie des Techniques en Inde. Paris: Eds. MSH
87. Malinowski B. 1935. Coral Gardens and their Magic: A Study of Tilling the Soil and of Agricultural Rites in the Trobrian Islands. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
88. McGaw JA. 1996. Reconceiving technology: why feminine technologies matter. See Wright 1996, pp.52-79
89. Mellström U. 2002. Patriarchal machines and masculine embodiment. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 27:460-78
90. Mellström U. 2003. Masculinity, Power and Technology: a Malaysian Ethnography. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate
91. Mellström U. 2004. Machines and masculine subjectivity: technology as an integral part of men's life experience. Men Mascul. 6:362-82
92. Miller D, ed. 1995. Acknowledging Consumption: A Review of New Studies. London: Routledge
93. Miller D, Slater D. 2000. The Internet: An Ethnographic Approach. Oxford: Berg
94. Miller L. 2004. Those naughty teenage girls: Japanese kogals, slang, and media assessments. J. Ling. Anthropol. 14:225-47
95. Mills MB. 2003. Gender and inequality in the global labor force. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 32:41-62
96. Misa TJ, Schot J. 2005. Inventing Europe: technology and the hidden integration of Europe. Hist. Technol. 21:1-19
97. Moore H. 1986. Space, Text and Gender: An Anthropological Study of the Marakwet of Kenya. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
98. Oakley A. 1974. The Sociology of Housework. London: Martin Robertson
99. Oldenziel R, de la Brohèze AA, de Wit O. 2005. Europe's mediation junction: technology and consumer society in the twentieth century. Hist. Technol. 21:107-39
100. Ong A, Collier SJ. 2005. Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics, and Ethics as Anthropological Problems. New York/Oxford: Blackwell
101. Ortiz S. 2002. Laboring in the factories and in the fields. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 31:395-417
102. Oudshoorn N, Pinch T, eds. 2003. How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press
103. Oudshoorn N, Rommes E, Stienstra M. 2004. Configuring the user as everybody: gender and design cultures in information and communication technologies. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 29:30-63
104. Paechter C. 2006. Power, knowledge, and embodiment in communities of sex/ gender practice. Women's Stud. Int. Forum 29:13-26
105. Pardo V. 2004. Le récit des deux tisseuses. Tech. et Cult. 43-44:277-87
106. Parr J. 1999. What makes a washday less blue? Gender, nation and technology choice in postwar Canada. Technol. Cult. 38:153-86
107. Parthasarathy J. 2003. Knowledge is power: genetic testing for breast cancer and patient activism in the United States and Britain. See Oudshoorn & Pinch 2003, pp. 133-50
108. Pfaffenberger B. 1992. Social anthropology of technology. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 21:491-516
109. Pfaffenberger B. 2001. Symbols do not creat meanings - activities do: or, why symbolic anthropology needs the anthropology of technology. See Schiffer 2001a, pp. 77-86
110. Pinch T, Bijker W. 1987. The social construction of facts and artifacts. See Bijker et al. 1987, pp. 17-51
111. Pinney C. 2002. Visual culture. In The Material Culture Reader, ed. V Buchli, pp. 81-104. Oxford: Berg
112. Rabinow P. 1996. Making PCR: A Story of Biotechnology. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
113. Rabinow P, Dan-Cohen T. 2005. A Machine to Make a Future: Biotech Chronicles. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
114. Rafael V. 2003. The cell phone and the crowd: messianic politics in the contemporary Philippines. Public Cult. 15:399-425
115. Rapp R. 1998. Refusing prenatal diagnosis: the meanings of bioscience in a multicultural world. Sci. Technol. Hum. Val. 23:45-70
116. Richards AI. 1939. Land, Labor and Diet in Northern Rhodesia. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
117. Schiffer MB, ed. 2001a. Anthropological Perspectives on Technology. Albuquerque: Univ. N.M. Press
118. Schiffer MB. 2001b. Toward an anthropology of technology. See Schiffer 2001a, pp. 1-15
119. Shove E, Southerton D. 2000. Defrosting the freezer: from novelty to convenience, a narrative of normalization. J. Mat. Cult. 5:301-19
120. Sillitoe P. 1988. Made in Niugini. Technology in the Highlands of Papua New Guinea. London: Br. Mus.
121. Silverstone R, Hirsch E, eds. 1992. Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces. London: Routledge
122. Sorensen KH, Berg AJ, eds. 1991. Technology and Everyday Life: Trajectories and Transformations. Oslo: Nor. Res. Counc. Sci. Humanit.
123. Stanley A. 1993. Mothers and Daughters of Invention: Noter for a Revived History of Technology. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press
124. Staudenmaier JS. 1985. Technology's Storytellers: Reweaving the Human Fabric. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
125. Strathern M. 1992. Reproducing the future: anthropology, kinship and the new reproductive technologies. London: Routledge
126. Suchman LA. 1999. Working relations of technology production and use. See Mackenzie & Wajcman 1999, pp. 258-65
127. Suchman LA. 2001. Building bridges: practice-based ethnographies of contemporary technology. See Schiffer 2001a, pp. 163-78
128. Traweek S. 1988. Inventing machines that discover nature. In Beam Times, Life Times: The World of High Energy Physics, pp. 46-73. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
129. van Oost E. 2003. Materialized gender: configuring the user during the design, the testing, and the selling of technologies. See Oudshoorn & Pinch 2003, pp. 193-208
130. Wajcman J. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology. Cambridge, UK: Polity
131. Wajcman J. 2002. Reflections on gender and technology studies: In what state is the art? Soc. Stud. Sci. 30(3):447-64
132. Wajcman JP. 2004. Technofeminism. Cambridge, UK: Polity
133. Warnier JP. 1999. Construire la Culture Matérielle-l'Homme qui Pensait avec ses Doigts. Paris: PUF
134. Weiner AN. 1992. Inalienable Possessions: The Paradox of Keeping-While-Giving. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
135. Wenger E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
136. Wilk R. 2005. Comment on Horst & Miller. Curr Anthropol. 46:772
137. Wilson SM, Peterson LC. 2002. The anthropology of online communities. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 31:449-67
138. Winner L. 1986. Do artifacts have politics?. In The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology, pp. 19-39. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
139. Wright MW. 2001. Desire and the prosthetics of supervision: a case of maquiladora flexibility. Cult. Anthropol. 16:354-73
140. Wright RP, ed. 1996. Gender and Archaeology. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press
141. Wyatt S. 2003. Non-users also matter: the construction of users and nonusers of the Internet. See Oudshoorn & Pinch, 2003, pp. 67-80