I think embracing Haraway’s  cyborg idea makes sense on many levels, few of which I actually understand… I do see the initial and even continuing separation of women from technology; and think assuming the rights to deal in/with technology as beneficial. I like the points she makes about identity politics: “There is nothing about being ‘female’ that naturally binds women. There is not even such a state as ‘being’ female, itself a highly complex category constructed in contested sexual scientific discourses and other social practices.” I’m all about blurring some boundaries, which Haraway seems to be a fan of as well.

She discusses women as “integrated circuit to name the situation of women in a world so intimately restructured through the social relations of science and technology. She views women’s place in this circuit in terms of the home, market, paid work place, state, school, clinic-hospital, and church. Haraway sees the cyborg world as “great riches for feminists explicitly embracing the possibilities inherent in the breakdown of clean distinctions between organism and machine and similar distinctions between the Western self. It is the simultaneity of breakdowns that cracks the matrices of domination and opens geometric possibilities.” Good, yes?

The Manifesto ends with a discussion of how cyborg imagery can express two crucial arguments:

  1. “The production of the universal, totalizing theory is a major mistake that misses most of reality, probably always, but certainly now.
  2. Taking responsibility for the social relations of science and technology, means refusing an anti-science metaphysics, a demonology of technology, and so means embracing the skilful task of reconstructing the boundaries of daily life, in partial connection with others, in communication with all of our parts.”

Yeah, so… something fun. Watch the video for Haraway’s appearance in this cyborg anime film.

And an interesting interpretation of Cyborg Manifesto…A Trip to the Zoo