Search results

In this paper I discuss how feminist research focusing epistemological issues can be used within computer science (CS). I approach and explore epistemological questions in computer science through a number of themes, which I believe are important to the issues of what knowledge is produced as well as how it is produced and how knowledge is perceived in CS. I discuss for example paradigms and metaphors in computer science, the role of abstractions and the concept of naturalisation. In order to illustrate epistemological views in CS and how these can be questioned from the viewpoints of feminist epistemology, I also do a close reading and commenting of a recent book within the philosophy of computing.

This chapter addresses growing concerns that, despite being a radically intentioned community, Critical Management Studies (CMS) lacks an orientation to achieve pragmatic change. In response I argue that the failure to address the continuing marginalisation of the subaltern is key to CMS being negatively represented as an elitist self-preoccupied endeavour. This state of affairs is linked to a legacy of the ‘postmodern’ turn, which emerged in the 1980s and 1990s, as evidenced by the nature of contemporary debates continuing to reflect the stylistic fetishes of that time. I contend that the ghost of postmodernism is evident in the continuing predilection to produce signification discourses marked by symbolic absences, which politically confine such texts to the level of epistemology. The lack of integration of ontological concerns means that corporeal aspects of daily life are neglected, resulting in an abstracted ‘subjectless’ mode of representation. To address these limitations, a feminist activist version of post-structuralism (PSF) of the time is revisited, which through its distinctive attention to community concerns, enabled the linking of epistemological and ontological representations; thereby facilitating the creation of a framework for pragmatic change. As the chapter demonstrates, by drawing attention to the integral relationship between the modes of representation, power relations and subsequent social effects, poststructuralist feminists were able to achieve praxis outcomes. Accordingly, I argue this treasure house of ideas needs to be reclaimed and provides illustrations of the design principles proffered to support my contentions.

After multiple decades stumbling in the status attainment wilderness, the sociological study of inequality is now cultivating a new garden: the workplace generation of inequalities. While our theories have long focused on contextually embedded social relations – often in production – as generating inequality, our methods have lagged, focusing instead on individual status attainment, abstracted from social relations including those at work. In this chapter, we outline first how we got into this mess, and then advocate a principled comparative methodological framework for studying the organizational generation of durable inequalities. We highlight the particular contribution of Randy Hodson to the original critique of individualistic status attainment research and his role in developing alternative methodologies, some of which we think should be further developed today.

Kramer and Kramarae have identified four sets of masculine gendered ideas that are used in conceptualising the Internet: anarchy, frontier, democracy and community. These are constitutive ideas as opposed to regulative ones; in other words they constitute the Internet. I suggest two alternative constitutive ideas, but not necessarily ‘feminine’ ones, that might be used as constituent parts of the Internet. These are reflexivity, or examining what we are about, and pluralism. The more widespread adoption of these two principles as constitutive ethics would have a profound effect on teaching and practice of using not just the Internet, but developing and using ICT more generally.

The purpose of this paper is to argue that the legacy of instrumental rationality has had a profoundly impoverishing effect on rational accounts of organisation, and that even though non‐rational accounts move beyond instrumental rationality, they remain tied to economist assumptions. The paper outlines the broader Weber and Habermas's model of rationality, and demonstrates its application.

Drawing on verbatim quotes from a sampling of 35 in‐depth interviews, the paper reveals the range of very different rationalities expressed in the social relations of work, of four very specific types of organisation: a bureaucracy, an entrepreneurial unit, a producer co‐operative and a worker co‐operative.

The paper outlines two ideal sets of findings, ideal in the sense that in two of the organisations the rationalities, social relations of work and associated outcomes fit well with the Weber and Habermas model of instrumental strategic action and social strategic action.

This study shows the potential for broader rationality as it plays out in the workplace. The notion of workplaces that free workers to contribute in socially strategic ways points to new approaches to management and organisation.

The paper offers practical insights into social relations built on co‐operation, moral judgement and communication.

The power of the idea of broader rationality is that being more rational, i.e. attending to more than a narrow impoverished view, provides the prospect of action advancing the social and the economic in a profound way.

The article argues for the necessity of theory within sociology, in general, and metatheory, in particular. It explores how theoretical, metatheoretical, and philosophical background conditions affect sociological research. It makes the case for why attending to background conditions is important for both the sociologist as an individual and also sociology as a collective and a discipline. In this context, it makes the case for critical realism as a useful program of metatheoretical reflexivity that focuses upon the more philosophical dimensions of sociology including the place of ontology and even how theory itself should be understood.

The purpose of this paper is to critique the argument that research methodology is gendered and present a post‐essentialist understanding of research methods.

A conceptual paper which engages with the feminist debate over the gendering of methodology.

The paper begins by discussing the feminist critique of positivism that quantitative methodologies embody patriarchal assumptions. Then, drawing on contemporary attempts by feminists to rehabilitate quantitative research, and developments in organizational research methods, it counters the argument that methodologies are gendered. Specifically, it argues the idea that methods embody gendered assumptions is founded on essentialist reasoning and treats them as having immutable characteristics. Moving on, the paper offers a post‐essentialist understanding of “methods as text”. Key advantages of this metaphor are that it acknowledges the interpretative flexibility of research methods and illustrates the rhetorical function descriptions of them perform in particular contexts. Finally, the contributions and limitations of this perspective and its implications for future research are summarised.

Further research is needed to understand how research methods are discursively constructed and the rhetorical functions descriptions of them perform in specific contexts.

The paper critiques the view that research methodology is gendered and offers a novel metaphor for understanding research methods. It is likely to be of most value to social scientists with an interest in research methods and/or feminist epistemologies.

I am the oldest daughter from a family of five girls. I was born in the 1950s and had my first real encounters with feminism as a social movement during the second wave women's liberation movement in the United States in the 1970s. This movement had an important impact on me. Despite the appeal of the women's movement for me, I lived a powerfully gendered life. I had not been allowed to read The Lord of the rings series in school because I was a girl. I detested Barbie dolls and yet was sentenced to hours of play with them if I was to have any social life at all. I had to pretend that I neither liked nor was competent at math and science. My high school boyfriend was paying me a compliment when decades after high school he told me, “At least you never let on that you were smart. I always appreciated that about you.” When I attended the first day of a basic calculus class at a public university in 1981, the professor announced, “No female has ever passed a class with me.” In 1983, I was reprimanded by my elementary school principal for wearing slacks to teach. This was reminiscent of my childhood days when my parents finally, but only, allowed me to wear trousers to school on Fridays. In 1990, my 5-year-old daughter told me, “Well, mom, everyone knows boys are smarter than girls” (of course she has since changed her mind!).

When leaders critically examine their social identity, privilege, and positionality, they become clear about when to engage in self-promotion and when to use their power to lift up and liberate the skills and talents of others. This style of liberatory leadership invites leaders into humbled, courageous excellence that inspires greater equity and justice in organizations, systems, and society as a whole. This chapter highlights the author’s experiences grappling with both her gender and her race and how it has shaped her understanding of humility within personal relationships and organizations. It invites the reader to reflect on his/her/their own social identity and how it impacts their approach to leading and leadership with courageous yet humbled excellence.