Scale(s) of Sexuate Difference

Luara Karlson-Carp, Geoffrey Hondroudakis
{"title":"Scale(s) of Sexuate Difference","authors":"Luara Karlson-Carp, Geoffrey Hondroudakis","doi":"10.54195/technophany.13805","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technofeminism has long known that it must be a multi-scalar feminism, that is, able to think, encounter, and negotiate these increasing scales of complexity that comprise our world, from the pharmacological to the planetary-computational. We read technofeminism as constitutively defined by its commitment to both realism and anti-essentialism, and contemporary technofeminisms to be epitomised by, on the one hand, the flat vitalist ontology of new materialism, and on the other, the trans-scalar rationalism of Xenofeminism. By examining these contemporary technofeminisms through contemporary theorisations of the concept of scale, we show that they have a problem with what the latter identify as ‘scalar collapse’; these technofeminisms conceptualise the multi-scalarity of reality, in the last instance, via a collapse into either the ‘master scale’ of new materialist ‘matter’, or via the ‘trans-scalar zoom’ of Xenofeminist rationalism. As such, they recoil from the reality of scalar differences, undermining their commitment to realism (and therefore technics), as well as reducing scalar difference to one unitary, ‘metaphysical’ ground, placing them back within an essentialist collapse. Through examining contemporary theorisations of scale, we claim that in order to avoid such scalar collapse, any truly multi-scalar theory must think difference as both ontogenetic, in the Simondonian sense, and irreducibly at-least-two, in the sense of Irigaray’s concept of sexuate difference. Against any concerns that Irigaray’s notion of sexuate difference may be essentialist or determinist, we show that the ontogenetic character of this difference means it is irreducible and yet also open-ended, that is, open to multiply complex, topologically scalar transformations throughout subsequent individuations. It is this thinking of difference as this ontogenetic ‘at least two’ that can enable contemporary technofeminisms to be truly multi-scalar feminisms.","PeriodicalId":428251,"journal":{"name":"Technophany, A Journal for Philosophy and Technology","volume":"8 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technophany, A Journal for Philosophy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54195/technophany.13805","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Technofeminism has long known that it must be a multi-scalar feminism, that is, able to think, encounter, and negotiate these increasing scales of complexity that comprise our world, from the pharmacological to the planetary-computational. We read technofeminism as constitutively defined by its commitment to both realism and anti-essentialism, and contemporary technofeminisms to be epitomised by, on the one hand, the flat vitalist ontology of new materialism, and on the other, the trans-scalar rationalism of Xenofeminism. By examining these contemporary technofeminisms through contemporary theorisations of the concept of scale, we show that they have a problem with what the latter identify as ‘scalar collapse’; these technofeminisms conceptualise the multi-scalarity of reality, in the last instance, via a collapse into either the ‘master scale’ of new materialist ‘matter’, or via the ‘trans-scalar zoom’ of Xenofeminist rationalism. As such, they recoil from the reality of scalar differences, undermining their commitment to realism (and therefore technics), as well as reducing scalar difference to one unitary, ‘metaphysical’ ground, placing them back within an essentialist collapse. Through examining contemporary theorisations of scale, we claim that in order to avoid such scalar collapse, any truly multi-scalar theory must think difference as both ontogenetic, in the Simondonian sense, and irreducibly at-least-two, in the sense of Irigaray’s concept of sexuate difference. Against any concerns that Irigaray’s notion of sexuate difference may be essentialist or determinist, we show that the ontogenetic character of this difference means it is irreducible and yet also open-ended, that is, open to multiply complex, topologically scalar transformations throughout subsequent individuations. It is this thinking of difference as this ontogenetic ‘at least two’ that can enable contemporary technofeminisms to be truly multi-scalar feminisms.
性别差异量表
技术女性主义很早就知道,它必须是一种多尺度的女性主义,也就是说,它能够思考、遭遇和协商构成我们世界的复杂性尺度的不断增加,从药理学到行星计算。我们将技术女性主义解读为由其对现实主义和反本质主义的承诺所构成的,而当代技术女性主义的缩影,一方面是新唯物主义的平面生命论本体论,另一方面是Xenofeminism的跨尺度理性主义。通过当代尺度概念理论对这些当代技术女性主义的研究,我们发现它们在后者所认定的 "尺度坍缩 "方面存在问题;这些技术女性主义将现实的多尺度性概念化,最后要么坍缩到新唯物主义 "物质 "的 "主尺度",要么坍缩到异女性主义理性主义的 "跨尺度缩放"。因此,他们从标度差异的现实中退缩,破坏了他们对现实主义(因而也是技术学)的承诺,并将标度差异还原为一个统一的、"形而上学 "的基础,将他们重新置于本质主义的坍塌之中。通过研究当代尺度理论,我们认为,为了避免这种尺度坍塌,任何真正的多尺度理论都必须把差异视为西蒙顿意义上的本体论,以及伊里加雷性别差异概念意义上的不可或缺的至少两个差异。有人担心伊里格瑞的性别差异概念可能是本质主义或决定论的,针对这种担心,我们表明,这种差异的本体论特征意味着它是不可还原的,但也是开放的,也就是说,在随后的个体化过程中,它可以进行多重复杂的、拓扑学上的标度转换。正是这种将差异视为 "至少两个 "的本体论思维,使当代技术女性主义成为真正的多尺度女性主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信