Week 6 Reflection — Theories of Media and Technology

This week we talked a lot about social constructs and their impact on science, technology, and society. I’d say this week was one of my favorites, as I am an STS student, and I’m very interested in how these dynamics are created through society and reinforced through technology, and justified by science.

I found the reading on the menstrual cycles to be particularly interesting because societal stereotypes have been constructed around this notion, which has been reinforced through varying types of technology. Within this context, I immediately think about the applications that have been created regarding tracking menstrual cycles and then physical products that are purchased that help with these cycles. I think what’s interesting about this is that it represents how constructs are so integrated into our society that we develop markets to function within. Additionally, it’s also interesting how these constructs remain in a binary.

For example, there’s the binary and dominant construct of male and female, or gay and straight. Anything outside the dominant binaries is always challenged by society — even though they are in themselves, social constructs. I thought a lot about this idea of gender performance theory by Judith Butler this week because it also illustrated some of the topics we were covering quite well. Because society is so invested in these constructs, they also become something that we perform, and it’s challenging not to conform to the constructs that exist. For example, if you think about the notion of gender before a child is even born, there are things like gender reveals, blue/pink clothing, boy-type furniture and girl type furniture, etc. These dominant constructs of gender have manifested themselves in the way we design and implement technology throughout society. When thinking about dominance within gender, most types of technology were developed for white males. For example, tools that we all use today, such as the iPhone, had minimal ideals of what anyone outside the binary experience would be with the technology. This topic also reminded me of the conversation we had recently regarding the speculum. The speculum is a physical product, and while it might not have been designed to maintain the constructs of male/female, it was designed by a male. And this idea that a certain group that doesn’t experience the same things as another group could be able to design for them is entirely problematic.

If we look at race and racism, we can see a ton of examples of how constructs manifest themselves through technology. Looking at modern technology like artificial intelligence and face-tracking software. The dominant construct of whiteness manifests itself through those techs. The software has been trained to recognize whiteness and discriminates against people of color. To be more specific, Face algorithms can clearly identify white people more than people of color, and that also represents itself in Face ID used to identify “criminals.” So in this example, we have the construct of race, and racial hierarchy represented in society and has allowed technology to become racist based on the designers who have created them. It’s not necessarily that the technology is racist. More so, the designers who have developed them have internal biases that could be inadvertent, still, harmful to those who are not part of the dominant traits.

It’s really interesting to see how the male figure’s dominant traits and how it manifests itself through society, science, and technology. I think what’s most problematic about this notion is the stereotypes that are forced upon individuals in order to perform the construct. But also, it’s interesting to see how it affects our practices as designers. I think it’s very important for us to recognize the constructs within society and ensure we are designing against those constructs that are harmful to society. I would even go as far as to say it’s a responsibility as designers to do so. If not, we play a part in perpetuating those dominant structures that are in some sense forced upon people. I think frameworks like Design thinking, which emphasize working with the end-user, can be really helpful because they help get you out of the designing for people mentality, which can perpetuate certain ideas that aren’t necessarily the case. I also think that courses like these help people see the impact they can have on society. I’d also say my STS degree has helped me realize how things that might be presented as fact aren’t necessarily so and the harmful natures those ideas can have on society. In the end, it’s important to realize the impact we have on society and design in a way that supports people rather than in a way that further place constructs on them.