The significant screwdriver: Care, domestic masculinity, and interaction design

Proceedings of HCI 2011 - 25th BCS Conference on Human Computer Interaction

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 371-377

  Bardzell, Shaowen ^a   Gross, Shad ^a   Wain, Jeffrey ^a   Toombs, Austin ^a   Bardzell, Jeffrey ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Domestic care work; Feminist HCI; Gender; Interaction design; Research through design

Indexed keywords

SCREWS; TOOLS;

DOMESTIC CARE WORK; DOMESTIC LIFE; END USERS; GENDER; INTERACTION DESIGN; POLITICAL FORCES; SOCIAL ISSUES; SOCIAL NORM;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 84907418643     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.14236/ewic/hci2011.67     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. Bardzell, S. Feminist HCI: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. Proc. CHI 2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA. ACM Press (2010). 1301-1310.
2. Bardzell, S., and Churchill, E. Feminism and HCI: New Perspectives. Interacting with Computers (In press).
3. Belk, R., and Wallendorf, M. (1992). Of mice and men: Gender identity in collecting. In Pearce, S. (ed.). Interpreting Objects and Collections. Routledge, London and New York, 240-253.
4. Berg A. and Lie M. Feminism and constructivism: do artifacts have gender? Science, Technology, & Human Values 20, 3 (1995). 332-351.
5. Bianchi, S., Milkie, M., Sayer, L., and Robinson, J. Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor. Social Forces 79, 5 (2000). 191-228.
6. Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. Proc. of CHI'07, ACM Press (2007), 503-512.
7. Boehner, K., Vertesi, J., Sengers, P., Dourish, P. How HCI interprets the probes. In Proc. of CHI'07. NY: ACM Press. 1077-1086.
8. Churchill, E.F. (2010). Sugared Puppy Dog Tails. Interactions, XVII.2 - March / April, 2010
9. Cockburn, C., & Ormrod, S. (1993). Gender and Technology in the Making. Sage Publications, Ltd., 1993.
10. Coltrane, S. and Shih, K. Gender and the division of labor. Handbook of Gender Research in Psychology 5 (2010). 401-422.
11. Cowan, R. (1983). More Work for Mother: The Ironies of Household Technology from the Open Hearth to the Microwave. Basic Books.
12. Fallman, D. Why Research-Oriented Design Isn't Design-Oriented Research. Proc. NordiCHI 2005, Umea Institute of Design Press (2005).
13. Female Interaction: http://www.femaleinteraction.com/ (retrieved Feb 14, 2011)
14. Femme Den: http://www.femmeden.com/ (retrieved Feb 14, 2011)
15. Frayling, C. Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers 1, 1 (1993), 1-5.
16. Gaver, W., Dunne, T., and Pacenti, E. Cultural probes. Interactions, (1996), 21-29.
17. Gelber, S. (2000). Do-It-Yourself: Constructing, repairing, and maintaining domestic masculinity. In Scanlon, S. (ed.). The Gender and Consumer Culture Reader. NYU Press.
18. Glick, P. and Fiske, S. An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist 56, 2 (2001). 109-118.
19. Lerman, N., Mohun, A., and Oldenziel, R. (1997). Versatile tools: Gender analysis and the his-tory of technology. Technology and Culture 38, 1-8.
20. Livingstone, S. (1992). The meaning of domestic technologies: A personal construct analysis of famili-al gender relations. In Silverstone, R. and Hirsch, E. (eds.). Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Space. Routledge.
21. McCarthy, J. and Wright, P. Technology as Experience. The MIT Press, 2004.
22. Megan And Murray. "Lecture Tonight: "Transgressive Architecture," Alex Schweder and Ward Shelley, Sert Gallery, Carpenter Center, Harvard." Retrieved from http://www.meganandmurray.com/2008/04/ lecture-tonight.html, 14 February 2011.
23. Williams, J. (1998). "Getting Housewives the Electric Message: Gender and Energy Marketing in the Early 20th Century." In R. Horowitz and A. Mohun (eds.). His and Hers: Gender, Consumption, and Technology. Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia.
24. Winner L. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109 (1980). 121-128.