Technology has progressed at an unquantifiable rate since the 90’s. Optimistic in its infancy, it is now a complicated, multifaceted creature that grows larger, scarier, and more useful by the day. The role of women and femininity in this sphere has likewise growth-spurted, ebbing and flowing as the technological beast has.

Donna Haraway’s “A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century,” written at the precipice of the technological revolution, likens us to cyborgs: part organic, part technology; part reality, part constructed fiction. This framework feels truer now more than ever.

Haraway frames cyborgs as existing in a post-gender world, the ultimate ideal and utopia for society. However, the issue she acknowledges and then counters is that, “The main trouble with cyborgs, of course, is that they are the illegitimate offspring of militarism and patriarchal capitalism, not to mention state socialism. But illegitimate offspring are often exceedingly unfaithful to their origins. Their fathers, after all, are inessential” (151).

Does this apply to modern cyborgs? Why do so many creators frame their technological creations as gendered? How often are these creations of media unfaithful to their origins? How do we acknowledge that some creations, much like these societal cyborgs that Haraway discusses, are in an inherently more privileged position to rebel? Can we separate the social constructions from the cyborg, when the cyborg inherently requires some form of inorganic creation by a member of these societies?

Alexandra Hidalgo’s “Cámara Retórica: A Feminist Filmmaking Methodology for Rhetoric and Composition” is female-created, female-oriented, female-purposed. Its intent is clear, and that intent is clearly framed by diverse female agency. The women she includes within her story are also feminist filmmakers.

But, we must also consider the popular mass media that exists, the movies and games and technologies that bombard us daily. How are women, cyborgs themselves, positioned? How often are the constructed fictions from the real world perpetuated through attempts at representing women in technology?

Virtual assistants have female voices: Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa, Google’s Google Home, and Microsoft’s Cortana. Many are named after women or female characters. All are devoted A.I. “servants” and symbols of a tech industry lacking in diversity. These are not cyborgs, but are aiding in the perpetuation of gendered, fictional constructs. They are symptoms of a larger disease that is permeating our everyday technological lives.

Why does Joaquin Phoenix fall in love with Scarlettt Johansson’s disembodied voice in Her? He is lonely man, she is a mere A.I. operating system with a sultry, feminine voice and careful sense of humor. She is a tool he learns from on his pathway to being a more secure man, as he realizes his love for a “human” woman as well. Why is she gendered? How is she still somehow sexualized without an organic body?

Ex Machina is another obvious connection–a literal female cyborg, a layered plot where the technology takes on more standardized, “desirable” characteristics in order to take advantage of the human men and escape into the world. A male filmmaker, but a definite attempt at subverting the patriarchal influence on the creation and manipulation of cyborg technology. An attempt at a nuanced Frankenstein of the future, but still somehow feels wrong–is the white, cis-gendered representation of the cyborg harmful in its perpetuation? Is there actual meta commentary happening in regards to the role of men and women in the technological landscape?

There are countless representations of cis, white female cyborgs in video games and television shows as well. Haraway was not discussing cyborgs in the half-robot, half-human way. She explains that women themselves exist as cyborgs, partly organic and partly framed through fictitious constructs. But the fictional constructs will not progress, change, or die unless done on a widespread level.

More women of color, trans women, and non-binary women need to be given opportunities to produce work on a widespread level. They deserve the structural changes and opportunities needed to better support them as they enter the technology field, the filmmaking field, the television field, and more. Hidalgo’s video chapter book serves as a helpful guideline for feminist filmmaking, and the first part absolutely starts with having more feminist hands in the pot.