Wear and Care

Wernimont, Jacqueline; Losh, Elizabeth

doi:10.4324/9781315730479-10

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It asks questions of the past, present, and future of DH that bring (an often intersectional) feminism into conversation with the digital artefacts that the digital humanities creates, and the people, processes, platforms, ideas, histories, and more, that give rise to them, e.g. (Wernimont and Losh, 2018). Ongoing questions include how technology can advance (Wernimont, 2013), or indeed, impede the attainment of equality and co-liberation (Risam, 2015; Nyhan and Terras, 2017; Wernimont, 2018); how gender, and other modes of difference, can impact technological encounter and creation (Nowviskie, 2015; Posner, 2015) and how feminism might remake DH (#transformDH, Bailey et al.…”

Section: Research Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender influences in Digital Humanities co-authorship networks

Gao

Nyhan

Duke‐Williams

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper presents a co-authorship study of authors who published in Digital Humanities journals and examines the apparent influence of gender, or more specifically, the quantitatively detectable influence of gender in the networks they form.Design/methodology/approachThis study applied co-authorship network analysis. Data has been collected from three canonical Digital Humanities journals over 52 years (1966–2017) and analysed.FindingsThe results are presented as visualised networks and suggest that female scholars in Digital Humanities play more central roles and act as the main bridges of collaborative networks even though overall female authors are fewer in number than male authors in the network.Originality/valueThis is the first co-authorship network study in Digital Humanities to examine the role that gender appears to play in these co-authorship networks using statistical analysis and visualisation.

show abstract

Section: Research Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender influences in Digital Humanities co-authorship networks

Gao

Nyhan

Duke‐Williams

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the ideals and contributions of individual feminist hackerspaces have been well documented (e.g. Toupin, 2013Toupin, , 2014Greenfield, 2014;Henry, 2014;Fox et al, 2015a;Tanczer, 2015b;Rosner & Fox, 2016;Davies, 2017;Foster, 2017Foster, , 2019Foster & Boeva, 2018;Kirtz, 2018;Wernimont & Losh, 2018;Loes & Chiappini, 2019), conceptualizing these spaces as a part of the wider global hackerspace network is lacking.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…82+ published books and project guides, Make: magazine, the makezine.com website, the Make: Community social media platform, the Make: television channel, K-12 educational programs and camps (MakerEd), and the worldwide Maker Faire events. In other words, although DIY cultures have long histories, these scenes tend to be described as niche Media Inc., 2015a;Waldman-Brown et al, 2015;Wernimont & Losh, 2018).…”

Section: I2 Makerspace Origins: Making Incorporatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While both hegemonic and non-hegemonic 'meaningful making' discourses emphasize the broad impacts of making-as-activism, critics of the 'Maker Movement' have shown that while makerspaces and Maker events do appear in poorer neighbourhoods, racialized communities, and developing countries, they typically only cater to a homogenous group of already privileged people. This has led some researchers to conclude that rather than empowering at-risk or in-need communities, Maker Culture is nothing more than re-packaged gentrification and neo-colonialism (Waldman-Brown et al, 2015;Wernimont & Losh, 2018;Gu & Shea, 2019). However, recent pandemic discourses have shown that when makerspaces employ a collective care approach, they can (at least modestly) have positive impacts on local communities, while still fostering a creative and innovative 'maker spirit'.…”

Section: Responsibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…). These residual influences of Maker Media Inc., and the discourses produced within wider Maker communities, have left many-including me-to question who benefits from participating in makerspaces and who does not (e.g., Currie Sivak, 2011; Alper, 2013;Ratto & Boler, 2014;Waldman-Brown et al, 2015;Sayers, 2017;Wernimont & Losh, 2018;Bogers & Chiappini, 2019;Gollihue, 2019)?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Re-Tooling the Sisterhood: Conceptualizing 'Meaningful Making' through Maker Culture, Makerspace Politics, and Feminist 'little m' making-as-activism

Ring¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hacktivism! Craftivism! DIY Feminism! The Maker Movement! In this dissertation, I unpack how certain Do-It-Yourself (DIY) practices have transformed from simple personal pastimes to meaningful sites for activism. To do so, I analyze three overlapping discursive terrains that I contend imbue DIY practices with a sense of 'meaningfulness'-which I term embodied materialism, critical making, and making as communication. I contend that all three of these terrains co-constitute making-as-activism identities, 'real-world' maker activist communities (makerspaces), and the wider makingas-activism network (Maker Culture). However, this blending of 'meaningful making' discourses is not evenly distributed, nor is it without contradictory logics and practices. Therefore, in this dissertation I analyze both mainstream (hegemonic) and countercultural (non-hegemonic) narratives of Maker Culture, makerspaces, maker identities, and making-as-activism. Through this multi-sided and multi-sited approach, I discovered that both hegemonic and non-hegemonic discourses co-produce the definitional boundary-work around 'what counts' as making-as-activism. Furthermore, I also contend that in using 'success narratives' and 'passionate work', the work/labour involved in producing Maker Culture are entangled in neoliberal logics-like empowerment and entrepreneurialism-which reproduces invisible structures of privilege within makerspaces. I also analyze how DIY politics and makerspace community-building have been adapted by Canadian feminist makers. Using interview data and my own experiences, I argue that feminist makers are building a non-hegemonic representation of Maker Culture by broadening what making-as-activism looks like, who does it, and how it intersects with holistic critical pedagogies. However, despite using a more reflective critical maker approach, I also discovered that feminist making and makerspaces can also re-produce many of the same contradictory logics that are found in mainstream, hegemonic Maker Culture. In concluding this work, I re-evaluate making-as-activism practices, identities, and communities within the context of the ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic. I conclude that collective care approaches are vital for building healthy communities-including makerspaces-and that joint responsibility can untangle some of the contradictory messiness that comes with leading an activist life in this contemporary moment.iii DedicationFor my parents, Lorraine Radke and Tom Ring, who instilled in me the value of tenacity.And for my beloved dog Baxter (August 21, 2010 -October 29, 2020, who showed me the benefits of walks in fresh air and well-deserved cookie breaks.

show abstract

Religious ideologies of minimal computing: negotiating digital technology in religious nationalist education

Sapir

2024

Learning, Media and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wear and Care

Cited by 5 publications

References 1 publication

Gender influences in Digital Humanities co-authorship networks

Gender influences in Digital Humanities co-authorship networks

Re-Tooling the Sisterhood: Conceptualizing 'Meaningful Making' through Maker Culture, Makerspace Politics, and Feminist 'little m' making-as-activism

Religious ideologies of minimal computing: negotiating digital technology in religious nationalist education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About