Tutorial Presentation - Cyberstalking: gender and computer ethics

Hey guys,

Sorry this is so late. I had the whole thing written up and blogger logged me out for no apparent reason and deleted my most recently saved copy! I want to scream! That's the last time I ever use Safari! Argh!

But here it is. If I suddenly remember if I left something out that was in here earlier, I will update - so keep your eyes peeled!

Cyberstalking: Gender and Computer Ethics - Alison Adam

Alison Adam's argues that feminist theory and ethics should be adapted to computer ethics on the basis that men and women have different online experiences due to:

•access: men have greater access to computers and the internet than women
•gender and/or power imbalence (latent or not): women and minority groups are usually targeted by the mainstream.

Feminist Ethics:

• rethinks traditional ethics that 'devalue the moral experience of women.' (text p. 212)

• Traditional Western Ethics fail women in five ways:

1) shows little concern for women's interests and rights as opposed to men's.

2) it dismisses the problems that arise in so-called private world, the realm in which women cook, clean, and care for the you, the old, and the sick.

3)it suggests, that on average, women are not as morally developed as men.

4) it overvalues culturally masculine traits like independence, autonomy, separation, mind, reason, culture, transcendence, war, and death, and undervalues culturally feminine traits like interdependence, community, connection, body, emotion, nature, immanence, peace, and life

5) it favors culturally masculine ways of moral reasoning that emphasize rules, universality, and impartiality over culturally feminine ways of moral reasoning that emphasize relationships, particularity, and partiality [1]

How feminist ethics would work online:

• The community(feminist) rather than the individual(traditional): this would provide a safety net for minority groups who do not have the confidence to defend themselves from online abuse. Eg. A cyberstalker attacking an individual is one thing, attacking a whole community is something else and a far more daunting project. Thus the internet would be seen as safe/safer - as opposed to now where it is considered dangerous (that we worry about identity theft and giving away personal details online is proof of this)

• Following from above: the internet becomes more user friendly, thus there is a profit to be made as well ;)

• Feminist ethics exposes power imbalances. People do not need to fear retribution for speaking out against the mainstream. In a sense the internet becomes more "democratic"

Case studies of harassment:

• Stephanie Brail, dating back to 1993: for defending another women who had been verbally attacked by a number of men for views on an alternative women's publication. Stephanie's name and details were posted on sex chat rooms and people began to contact her. The perp. was eventually traced.

• Jayne Hitchcock, 2000, had people posting claims that she was a pornographer on the net. The perp left sexually explicit messages that lead to people contacting her or coming to her house.


Questions (more to come when I remember them):

In your opinion is it possible for feminist (sorry, I am aware it said computer before, my bad) ethics to be incorporated into the net? Has it already been done? Or is the internet 'too far gone' down the road of western ethics to change?



[1] Tong, R. and Williams, N. Feminist Ethics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) (29th November 2006), plato.stanford.edu, available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-ethics/

in response to Therese and Nessi's posts....

JenniCAM:
In response to the line in Nessi’s post, “According to Jimroglou, JenniCAM destabilizing the traditional and tacit lines of the public and private self is another constituent of being a cyborg”, I don’t believe this is the case- yes she is presenting us with a view of her private life, but I am cynical about how ‘naturally’ she acted during the streaming- it is like Big Brother- I don’t believe that what you see is anything like how these people truly behave in their own homes. JenniCAM is a production. While she purports to be opening a window into her life, the very act of creating an online program about it turns into an exercise, a constructed narrative.
Also, in response to the line “Jimroglou also claimed that JenniCAM forced the term ‘voyeur’ to be re-evaluated. This is shown by Jenni holding the role of an object yet refusing the traditional illustration of objectification” I disagree- I don’t believe that Jenni, or any other person in that position has any control over how she will be viewed- objectification is not something that the ‘object’ can generally control. I cannot agree with Jimroglou when he says that she is ‘refusing objectification’ when the program showed Jenni getting dressed, having intercourse etc... This would have attracted men (and women) to watch, and I am certain she would have been objectified to some degree.

Cyber stalking:
I think the questions Therese posted are interesting, especially those in regards to how we behave online. I wrote above that I consider JenniCAM to be a program- a constructed narrative, that doesn’t entirely bear relation to her real life. I think the same idea applies to interfaces like Facebook or Myspace. My own profile is a carefully constructed presentation to highlight aspects of my life/personality that I think are favourable, and I dare anyone to say that their page is any different! I do not consciously construct my page like this, but it is natural to want to ‘put your best foot forward’.
In this respect, I think that the notion of Facebook-stalking, and invasion of privacy, while disturbing, are not the end of the world. The whole notion of Facebook is self-publicity. To complain about the invasion of privacy that it involves, is to try to have it both ways. If you have concerns about your information being widespread- don’t post it!!

Hope you found my comments useful!

Cyber Stalking

Just checking that everyone knows, this blog is assessed, and we are required to write about 300words per week. I was reading through the other tutorial blogs and Katherine from Thursday at 5pm posted a good set of questions in relation to the cyber-stalking text. I thought I'd borrow them and see if they can get some conversation started here too.


SO: some questions to get the ball rolling!
Does the internet need regulation?
What sort of laws (if any) are appropriate for a medium whose very foundation is in its capacity to diminish space and create a global online community for sharing and interacting?

How do you feel YOU interact online: are you comfortable in an online environment, do you think the fact that you have a relative degree of anonymity online changes your interaction (if any) with other users online?

FACEBOOK: friend or foe? Is Facebook a total invasion of privacy? And again harking back to the “online identities” concept, what facets of your persona do you choose to convey online on your profile? Do we have an “ethic of care” for ourselves, our friends, and other internet users? Or is this an impossible concept in an online community of millions? How do the internet communities and relationships we form online reflect those we make in real life?Happy blogging!
~ posted by Katherine2

Webliography - Caitlin (Question 2)

Images of artificially created beings have been widespread throughout science fiction texts, challenging ideas of what it means to be human. The notion of the cyborg has reflected cultural preoccupations with overcoming the limitations and flaws of the corporeal human body as well as anxieties about technology undermining the uniqueness of embodied human experience. The following sources each address the question of whether or not being human transcends the capabilities of the body.


1. Brain, Marshall. (2005). The Day You Discard Your Body. http://marshallbrain.com/discard1.htm (Accessed 26th August 2008)

In this essay Marshall Brain argues that human beings are trapped in our bodies and that, contrary to depictions of the body in science fiction, in the future we will discard our bodies and live in a virtual world. Brain’s argument is based on the assumption that what makes us human is contained within the brain and the fragility and mortality of the human body limits the potential capabilities of the brain. This essay draws mainly on examples from popular culture rather than any academic theories and is self-published, rather than being linked to a more credible website or database. It contains many unsubstantiated claims and it is difficult to separate the author’s opinion from researched evidence. However it offers an interesting point of view that is particularly relevant to this essay question and is another example of the body being viewed and portrayed as limiting to human capability.


2. Hacking, Ian. (1998). “Canguilman amid the Cyborgs” Economy and Society 27 (2) 202-216. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=6832633&site=ehost-live (Accessed 27th August 2008)

Hacking’s paper discusses various theoretical perspectives on the cyborg. Since its inception, the notion of the cyborg has been reinterpreted and reinvented throughout the academic and popular cultural spheres. Hacking focuses specifically on the essay Machine and Organism by Georges Canguilhem who argues that tools and machines are extensions of the body. Because Hacking’s paper discusses many different and often oppositional theoretical positions on the cyborg and its implications, it is difficult to decipher a central argument. This paper would be useful in answering the essay question as it thoroughly explores the main theories and theorists involved in analysis of the relationship between humans and machines and maps the evolution of notions of the cyborg from Clines and Kline (1960), to science fiction, to Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto (1985).

3. Rothstein, Edward. (1996). “Technology: CONNECTIONS; Cyborgs 'R' (Almost) Us, or how we may be turning into a multimedia experience”. New York Times, January 8, Late Edition (East Coast). http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/pqdweb?did=673534981&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=20923&RQT=309&VName=PQD (Accessed 27th August 2008).

Edward Rothstein’s article for the online edition of The New York Times provides a brief overview of the emerging significance of the cyborg in contemporary culture. The article discusses the prevalence of the cyborg in popular culture and the growing amount of academic discussion of cyborgs in feminism and politics. Rothstein raises ideas about the ever-growing relationship between technology and the body and its implications for the future. While this is not a scholarly article, it is a valuable text for analysis as it suggests that anxieties about technology are not confined to the academic arena. Rothstein’s article is an example of another text reinforcing the notion that being human transcends physical embodiment.

4. Shabot, Sara Cohen. (2006) “Grotesque Bodies: A Response to Disembodied Cyborgs”. Journal of Gender Studies. 15 (3) 223-235. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=24905686&site=ehost-live(accessed 27th August 2008)

In her paper Grotesque Bodies: A Response to Disembodied Cyborgs, Sara Cohen Shabot argues that the notion of the cyborg is problematic as it idealises the body as hypersexual, flawless and transcendent of the weaknesses of the corporeal human body. She argues that corporeal existence and carnal experiences are what make us human and that the prediction of a cyborgian future in science fiction texts borders on fascism. Shabot argues that the “grotesque body” is a more useful way to disrupt dichotomous ways of understanding the body. Shabot’s paper is particularly useful to this essay question as it provides an opposing view to the argument that the body limits our potential capabilities and experiences as human beings.

5. Shanken, Edward. (2005) “Hot to Bot: Pygmalion’s Lust, the Maharal’s Fear, and the Cyborg future of Art”. Technoetic Arts: A Journal of Speculative Research 3 (1) 43-55. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.library.uwa.edu.au/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17287387&site=ehost-live (Accessed 28th August 2008)

In his paper, Hot to Bot: Pygmalion’s Lust, the Maharal’s Fear, and the Cyborg future of Art, Edward Shanken explores the portrayal of robots and other artificially created beings in art and how this portrayal reflects the anxieties and preoccupations of the society in which they were created. With reference to representations in myths such as Pygmalion and the Golem through to more contemporary artistic and filmic texts, Shanken argues that the desire to artificially create life is fundamental to human nature, but that the power to turn a robot into a fully fledged human being is not within human capability. Shanken also argues that over time, artistic representations of the relationship between humans and technology have shifted from a portrayal of human control and status over the technology we create to a more fluid relationship where the difference between human being and robot is less distinct and suggestive of a cyborgian future. This paper would be particularly useful as it addresses the question, draws on other academic analysis and also discusses many other texts which raise issues regarding technology and the body.


Each of these sources addresses the idea that to be human transcends the physical body with varying degrees of utility. Two of the articles are not from scholarly sources, however they relate well to the question at hand and compliment the arguments made by the academic papers.

Webliography

WOMN2205 WEBLIOGRAPHY- Anna Hartley

'The figure of the cyborg is deeply implicated in western culture's fear of the monstrous other, which itself is a deeply gendered anxiety. Discuss'

Fear of the ‘other’ is an age old one, with new forms of the ‘other’ being constructed throughout history. This fear of other is also a deeply gendered issue, tied up with fear of the feminine. My webliography, which concerns itself primarily with the cyborg body, spans from discussions about the feminist theory of the monster Frankenstein, written decades ago, through to a modern websites devoted to a symbiotic study of art and critical theory, in medienkunstnetz.

1. Donna Haraway- “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century”

I have included this source because it would be a large oversight to exclude this seminal text from any discussion about cyborgs.

2. Leslie Swartz and Brian Watermeyer -“Cyborg anxiety: Oscar Pistorius and the boundaries of what it means to be human”

This article discusses the notion of the disabled in society as being viewed as somehow other than human. Oscar Pistorius is a disabled athlete who was prevented from competing alongside able-bodied athletes, because of fear that he would have an super-human, unfair advantage in the competition.

3. Yvonne Volkart- “Monstrous Bodies: The Disarranged Gender Body as an Arena for Monstrous Subject Relations”

A very comprehensive and intersting online resource, with articles on various topics concerned with the body. This article is based on the premise that the cyborg is so monstrous because it reflects the monstrosoty of the society which created it. “The cyborg body is always an effect and symptom body of the neoliberal information society. It is its product and its symbol, its sabotaging traversal and alternative conception of the subject“.
This article contains chapter links, the most useful to this topic in my opinion being ‘The Monstrosity of the Endlessly Interfaceable, Digital Body’.

4. Katherine Swan- “Feminism and Education in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”

This is a very interesting article which deals with the notion of the Frankenstein novel being a deeply gendered text. Swan posits that like Frankenstein must self-educate, women in the time of Mary Shelley had to do the same. Also that the “monster destroys on weak women, representing education’s destruction of female inferiority”.It basically links the age-old theme of fear of ‘other’ which Frankenstein epitomises, with feminist theory.
However, while the article reads well, the webpage it is hosted by is not a professional journal, but a user-contributed site. Thus, any articles referenced from the site must be carefully read to asses their academic value.

5. Judith Halberstam- “Automating Gender: Postmodern Feminism in the Age of the Intelligent Machine”

In this article, Halberstam argues that cyborgs have provided a new platform upon which to argue that “gender and its representations are technological products. In a sense, cybernetics simultaneously maps out the terrain for both postmodern discussions of the subject in late capitalism and feminist debates about technology, postmodernism and gender”.


In conclusion, I have found the above online resources very interesting and certainly useful in facilitating a good essay about the topic. I did find it difficult to sort through all the flotsam that is on the internet to come to suitable resources, but once I was on the right track I was pleasantly surprised at how much critical theory there is on this topic. This was an interesting assignment and I enjoyed researching it.


BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Donna Haraway, ‘A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century’, The European Graduate School, 1991,
http://www.egs.edu/faculty/haraway/haraway-a-cyborg-manifesto.html (accessed 03/09/08)

Leslie Swartz and Brian Watermeyer , ‘Cyborg anxiety: Oscar Pistorius and the boundaries of what it means to be human’, informaworld.com, March 2008, http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a791124509&fulltext=713240928, (accessed 03/09/08)

Yvonne Volkart, ‘Monstrous Bodies: The Disarranged Gender Body as an Arena for Monstrous Subject Relations’, medienkunstnetz, http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/themes/cyborg_bodies/monstrous_bodies/, (accessed 03/09/08)

Katherine Swan, ‘Feminism and Education in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’, Associated Content, Feb 2005, http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/13718/feminism_and_education_in_mary_shelleys.html?cat=38 (accessed 03/09/08)

Judith Halberstam, ‘Automating Gender: Postmodern Feminism in the Age of the Intelligent Machine, JStor, 1991,http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0046-3663(199123)17%3A3%3C439%3AAGPFIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M, (accessed 03/09/08)

Tutorial Presentation

For this week's tutorial presentation, I will be covering the article A Camera with a View: JenniCAM, Visual Representation and Cyborg Subjectivity written by Krissi M. Jimroglou. The article basically focused on JenniCAM, an online ‘homecam’ phenomenon that occurred in 1996. Jennifer Ringley, or more commonly known as Jenni, started a website dedicated to nothing else but daily pictures of herself – all captured by a digital camera mounted on top of her computer. The webpage refreshed automatically every few minutes displaying a new picture for viewers. In other words, one was able to view and study Jennifer Ringley’s daily life and her every move through digital images. In the span of the JenniCAM phenomenon, Jenni included nudity and also pictures of her sexual activities. However, it was stated that most of her pictures were not particularly exciting. The pictures took account of Jenni occupied in a mundane routine of working on her computer, checking emails or talking on the phone. Nevertheless, JenniCAM brought upon a large number of fans constantly hooked to their computers for the next refresh.

In the article, Jimroglou basically made a point that Jenni could be seen as a ‘cyborg subject’. He also addressed several issues such as hybridity, perversity and the psychoanalytic readings of JenniCAM in regards to the matter. I shall focus on the issue of hybridity between human and computer and also the perversity aspect that comes along with the concept of JenniCAM.

Hybridity
For the record in this class, in case anyone of you had forgotten, Donna Haraway defined a cyborg as ‘a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism’. Jimroglou suggested that through the integration of the human body and technology, Jenni could be the prime example of a cyborg. She was quoted as being not ‘fully human nor fully machine yet constituted, in part, by both’. In fact, the term JenniCAM itself showed the hybridity between human (Jenni) and machine (CAM). From the reading, I found it interesting that this notion only worked if Jenni is sitting at the computer. Jimroglou proposed it as a fusion between human and machine. In other words, once she moves away to the background and reveals her body, she is immediately distinguished as human again. In my opinion, I think she still could be categorized as a cyborg whether she sat in front of the computer or not. When a person views the picture of Jenni, say, wearing her socks, she is still seen to be a virtual image on a screen that has no physical presence. The uncertainty of the boundaries of what it means to be human remains. What is your take on this?

Perversity
According to Jimroglou, JenniCAM destabilizing the traditional and tacit lines of the public and private self is another constituent of being a cyborg. I would have to say that it is not easy to find someone who portrays his/her life on the World Wide Web 24/7. The article suggests that the whole concept of JenniCAM is undoubtedly perverse for an average college student, or anyone else for that matter. All in all, Jenni broke down the cultural norm which had people’s eyes peeled for more (quite literally, I bet.). In addition, Jimroglou also claimed that JenniCAM forced the term ‘voyeur’ to be reevaluated. This is due to the fact that JenniCAM portrayed a visual of something that was not meant to be seen or scrutinized but yet at the same time, Jenni was aware of being watched and wanted people to tune in. In relation to the perversity of the concept, I may have encountered that streak of narcissism myself a few times while webcamming with my friends back home. I’m cringing inside just thinking about it in retrospect but at that point of time, it happened quite… naturally. Ooh yeah, I’m gazing wistfully out of my window, hurry, look at me while I’m acting like I don’t know you’re looking. Anyway, like what Jimroglou suggested, the idea of JenniCAM evolved the relationship between the camera, the photographer, and the viewer. This is shown by Jenni holding the role of an object yet refusing the traditional illustration of objectification. Also, Jenni being a woman also brought forth a few points about gender relations. While I understand that the notion of voyeur could have been implemented by the preoccupation with the female body, I can't help but wonder if the 'homecam' phenomenon would be as attention-grabbing and cultivate the same degree of voyeurism if it was introduced to the world by a man.

FYI, JenniCAM has been long defunct. Rumour has it that she stopped because her boyfriend wasn't too comfy with the idea of being watched 24/7. Can't blame the guy, really. Anyway, I'll end it here with a Youtube video of Jenni appearing on the Late Show with David Letterman. Enjoy! :)

Hey Everybody

Hey all,
Since I didn't get the opportunity to introduce myself online previously, I will do so hastily now.
My main attraction to blogs has come about through my love of fashion. Fashion photography, particularly that of Street Style has really become popular in recent years. I even tried to start my own, which I think is hot linked through my name on this blog. My favourite such sites are the Sartorialist and the Facehunter which I recommend to all the fashion lovers in this tutorial.

Also, I have participated a lot on fashion forums which I guess takes on a slightly similar form to a blog. I'm interested in the way these sites are policed and the online communities they create.

But anyway, this looks to be an exciting few weeks as long as I remember to keep posting.
Regards,
Eva