Seeking Eccentricity

IF 0.3 Q4 SOCIOLOGY
A. S. Espinosa, Dresda Emma Méndez de la Brena
{"title":"Seeking Eccentricity","authors":"A. S. Espinosa, Dresda Emma Méndez de la Brena","doi":"10.24197/st.1.2021.i-vi","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Sociology and Technoscience monograph extends conversations and uses of eccentricity as a methodological tool for doing research within the field of feminist and gender studies. The search for eccentricity responds to the editors’ interest in reflecting on and engaging with different methodological approaches which help deviate from canonical established patterns of research onto unusual and provocative ways of doing research differently. In this collection we have gathered contributions dealing with the analysis of technologies of gender, sexuality and bodies to propose new ways to defocus, dislocate or blur the split between subjects and objects of study. In sum, with this monograph we intend to contribute to gender approaches to science by exploring \"eccentrically\" the ways feminist and gender scholars think and research otherwise. \nFeminist modes of knowledge and doing research have traditionally been excluded from academic discourses or denied the merits of their own specificity due to the constitution of the notion of “women” as a sexual differentiated subject. “Women”, as epistemological subject, has been trapped between the unrepresented or unrepresentable due to the articulation of what Michel Foucault calls “technologies of sex” - that is, mechanisms, apparatuses and discourses (legal, pedagogical, medical, demographic, religious or economic) that regulate sexuality.  Following the Foucaultian concept, Teresa De Lauretis (1987) coins the concept of “technologies of gender” to move away from the idea of gender as sexual difference towards its comprehension as a political tool instead. Technologies are hence understood as inseparable from their sociocultural milieus and the semiotic apparatuses which produce women and men, assigning an identity and a position to each individual within the social group. \n ","PeriodicalId":40467,"journal":{"name":"Sociologia y Tecnociencia","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociologia y Tecnociencia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24197/st.1.2021.i-vi","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Sociology and Technoscience monograph extends conversations and uses of eccentricity as a methodological tool for doing research within the field of feminist and gender studies. The search for eccentricity responds to the editors’ interest in reflecting on and engaging with different methodological approaches which help deviate from canonical established patterns of research onto unusual and provocative ways of doing research differently. In this collection we have gathered contributions dealing with the analysis of technologies of gender, sexuality and bodies to propose new ways to defocus, dislocate or blur the split between subjects and objects of study. In sum, with this monograph we intend to contribute to gender approaches to science by exploring "eccentrically" the ways feminist and gender scholars think and research otherwise. Feminist modes of knowledge and doing research have traditionally been excluded from academic discourses or denied the merits of their own specificity due to the constitution of the notion of “women” as a sexual differentiated subject. “Women”, as epistemological subject, has been trapped between the unrepresented or unrepresentable due to the articulation of what Michel Foucault calls “technologies of sex” - that is, mechanisms, apparatuses and discourses (legal, pedagogical, medical, demographic, religious or economic) that regulate sexuality.  Following the Foucaultian concept, Teresa De Lauretis (1987) coins the concept of “technologies of gender” to move away from the idea of gender as sexual difference towards its comprehension as a political tool instead. Technologies are hence understood as inseparable from their sociocultural milieus and the semiotic apparatuses which produce women and men, assigning an identity and a position to each individual within the social group.  
寻求偏心
这本社会学和技术科学专著扩展了对话和使用怪癖作为女权主义和性别研究领域研究的方法论工具。对怪癖的探索回应了编辑们对反思和采用不同方法论方法的兴趣,这些方法论方法有助于偏离规范的既定研究模式,转而采用不同寻常的、挑衅性的方式进行不同的研究。在本系列中,我们收集了有关性别、性和身体技术分析的贡献,以提出新的方法来散焦、错位或模糊研究对象和主体之间的分裂。总之,通过这本专著,我们打算通过“古怪”地探索女权主义者和性别学者的思考和研究方式,为科学的性别方法做出贡献。女性主义的知识和研究模式传统上被排除在学术话语之外,或者由于“女性”作为一个性别差异主体的概念的构成而被剥夺了其独特性的优点。“女性”作为一个认识论主体,由于米歇尔·福柯所说的“性技术”的阐述,即调节性行为的机制、装置和话语(法律、教育、医学、人口、宗教或经济),一直被困在无代表性和无代表性之间。继傅的概念之后,Teresa De Lauretis(1987)提出了“性别技术”的概念,以摆脱将性别视为性别差异的观念,转而将其理解为一种政治工具。因此,技术被理解为与其社会文化环境和符号学装置密不可分,符号学装置产生了女性和男性,为社会群体中的每个人分配了身份和地位。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信