Cyborgs, Femininity, Nature, and Secrets...A Feminist Critique is Sure to Poke its Critical Head!

Binaries, dualisms, and dichotomies are central to the power structure of Western society. These polarities permeate technology, medicine, science, and nature. This being no surprise, I first became bored with Donna Haraway and Evelyn Fox Keller’s explanations. However, once I actually began to understand their argument and the gendered metaphors from which they were drawing their critique, I began to think a bit differently. I am a cyborg. A consumer not only of this natural world, but of the technological world as well. I stand for the shifting of political and physical boundaries; that is because technology and civilization have become partners. Almost overlapping entities that create binaries that are not only based in human existence and this natural world, but of man-made components. Myself and any other human, if we so choose, have the ability to change our sex by way of genetic engineering or as a woman I am met with mandate procedures to hasten population control efforts. But because I exisit in the natural and cultural realm, I act as a hybrid. Now, there may be some who would argue this point, but if you really think about it, humans of the 21st century are not completely human. Now, of course, I am not saying that we are walking around with minds made of machinery and floating cells and organs, but with the advancement in the technological and medical field, we are outliving our destiny as complete humans. Rather, we are making use of medical inventions (that are made of machinery such as pacemakers, etc.) to extend our life, and in doing so we are challenging traditional binaries. Does this challenge then change the way in which gender is interpreted? Are women able to assume different roles and tap into different sectors of society? Or does this challenge mean that the masculinist forces will find a way to dissolve this “new duality”? I would have to yes. I mean it is quite evident in Keller’s “Making Gender Visible in the Pursuit of Nature’s Secrets” that the androcentric nature of western interpretation of human and natural existence has even been ascribed distinct adjectivites usually used in describing an individual’s gender. Nature as feminine or female in description was understood to be dark and secretive before science. Because of this alleged secrecy that nature (or better yet the female) embodied, science was used to lessen the threat of not knowing. Thus, in an effort to demolish this autonomous sphere, medical explorations were concentrated in exposing this supposed female inferiority. But the way to exposure was through research that aimed to learn the secrets of nature that were thought to be inextricably linked to female existence and power. The use of gendered medical language was used to suppress and place females in an inferior position. It is clever I must say. Clever because it was done in a subtle way. So subtle that only those in the medical field would have any actual knowledge being that their findings would be used to construct a social world based on narrow medical research that contributes to the dichotomous nature of human existence. It is most evident that dichotomies stem from science/medical research and then become integral to institutions and systems of power. If only women were able to be some of the first early scientists and biologists, life as we know it would be completely different--that is, gender neutral at least.