Sexual dynamics of the profession: Articulating theecriture masculineof science and technology

Bridging Analysis and Action

“…Also undertaken in TPC are ecofeminist critiques, which grew out of the second-wave feminist movement (see Griffin, 1978). Ecofeminism recognizes that women are symbolically tied to nature, and feminist TPC scholars have recognized “metaphors of domination and penetration” and an “androcentric bias of science and engineering” (Sauer, 1994, p. 309). This recognition has prompted research about how marginalized and oppressed groups are characterized through metaphors that weaken their power or their ability to claim their own identities (see Ross, 1994).…”

“…Often a necessary precursor to transformation is work that highlights problematic, exclusionary language. For example, feminists recognize the androcentric nature of domination metaphors in the official lexicon of science and engineering: “The language [that] engineers and scientists use to describe their world reflects clearly sexual metaphors: male and female sockets, male and female couplings, mine shafts that penetrate the earth, virgin timber, the big bang, studs, and screws” (Sauer, 1994, p. 309). These terms construct the “ ecriture masculine of science and technology” (p. 312), which illuminates the need for improved technical communication.…”

Apparent Feminism as a Methodology for Technical Communication and Rhetoric

“… A 1992 special issue of IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication was devoted to the effects of gendered assumptions on understandings of rationality (Bernhardt, 1992; Bosley, 1992; Dell, 1992; Neeley, 1992; Rifkind & Harper, 1992; Sauer, 1992; Tebeaux & Lay, 1992). A 1994 issue of Technical Communication Quarterly studied social understandings of gender (Allen, 1994; Bosley, 1994; Gurak & Bayer, 1994; LaDuc & Goldrick-Jones, 1994; Ross, 1994; Sauer, 1994). A 1997 special issue of Technical Communication Quarterly recovered histories of women technical communicators and questioned the scarcity of such histories (Durack, 1997; E. A.…”

“…paid attention to the importance of social factors and intersectionality in terms of oppressions, theories, methodologies, practices, and more (Allen, 1994; Bosley, 1994; Dragga, 1993; Gurak & Bayer, 1994; LaDuc & Goldrick-Jones, 1994; Ross, 1994; Sauer, 1994)…”

“…A. Flynn, 1997;J. Flynn, 1997;Hallenbeck, 2012;Lippincott, 2003;Skinner, 2012;Tebeaux, 1993) provided critical perspectives on technologies, sciences, terminologies, and social conventions that hide value systems in which misogyny is supported, valued, and reproduced (Bernhardt, 1992;Bosley, 1992;Brady Aschauer, 1999;Colletta, 1992;Dell, 1992;Haas et al, 2002;Lay, 1993;Neeley, 1992;Rifkind & Harper, 1992;Sauer, 1992;Tebeaux & Lay, 1992) engaged in interdisciplinary scholarship and activism (Bellwoar, 2012;Gregory, 2012;Koerber, 2002;Teston & Graham, 2012) paid attention to the importance of social factors and intersectionality in terms of oppressions, theories, methodologies, practices, and more (Allen, 1994;Bosley, 1994;Dragga, 1993;Gurak & Bayer, 1994;LaDuc & Goldrick-Jones, 1994;Ross, 1994;Sauer, 1994) intervened in problematic actions (including rhetorics) that exist in and between public spheres, private lives, disciplinary venues, and pedagogical spaces (Lay et al, 2001;Sauer, 1993) Technical communicators should listen to and emulate this important work, and they also should be aware-and troubled-that this work represents a minority population and a diminishing disciplinary trend. Apparent feminism can help remedy this.…”