“Introduction”

Haraway’s Cyborg  Manifesto, I would say, still has its relevance today. Although Haraway’s manifesto discusses technological advances, cyborgs, and posthumanism; feminism is to be discussed in her work. I first want to break this blog post into a few mini-sections. I would like to touch upon Haraway’s manifesto, the evolution of this manifesto, and the relevance of the manifesto with young women. 

Cyborg

As Haraway stated in her manifesto, the “​ cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of social reality as well as a creature of fiction” (149). Her use of the words “as well as” ties in the duality that the cyborg was created for. Haraway had several motivations behind creating the cyborg, the first I will discuss is all about duality. Haraway challenges the binary opposition. In standard societal norms, an object or person will always have an opposite (i.e. male/female, nature/culture, good/evil). However, the cyborg challenges this. Being that the cyborg is a “hybrid” or ,as described as “reality as well as fiction”,  the line of opposition becomes blurred with the cyborg. Because of this duality that Haraway has created, “the cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world; it has no truck with bisexuality, pre-oedipal symbiosis, unalienated labour, or other seductions to organic wholeness through a final appropriation of all the powers of the parts into a higher unity” (150) This, in turn, creates a notion to want to become the cyborg. Further creating hope to resist the patriarchal and oppressive system that discriminates on a gender-based level; as stated here (from what I understood) by Haraway, “those of polarity and hierarchical domination, are at issue in the cyborg world” (151). The cyborg’s creation was, as far as I am aware, ahead of its time. Being the manifesto was published in 1985, I feel its relevance of fluidity and non-binary conformity has evolved with the century. 

1985-2023

Haraway’s cyborg creation fits the needs of all women. As we approached the earlier years of the “2020s” the world, especially women, have undergone a lot of discriminatory backlash. None that I will personally get into, but women in general as well as different communities have been feeling the heat all over again. Bastian discusses the modernity of Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto. Bastian mentions how “mainstream feminism was criticized by women of color, who argued that the all‐encompassing category of ‘woman’ elided the lived realities of many women.” However, “Haraway’s notion of the cyborg was therefore conceived as a way of recognizing both of these critiques of hegemonic feminism” (Bastian). Because of the fluidity that is of the Cyborg, Haraway’s creation and concept of the Cyborg allow no distinction between races. The Cyborg just “is”, it is nothing more than just the cyborg, it has no distinct characteristics; this creates its relevance to today. As Haraway states, “Gender, race, or class consciousness is an achievement forced on us by the terrible historical experience of the contradictory social realities of patriarchy, colonialism, and capitalism.” (155), a concept that Haraway is trying to break with Cyborg. This also deems fit for the transgender community. In the 21st century, we have the LGBTQ community of beautifully gay or trans women. With that being said, I like to bring up the point Haraway mentioned that “there is not even such a state as ‘being’ female, itself a highly complex category constructed in contested sexual scientific discourses and other social practices.” (155). This leads to the modernity that this manifesto has. According to Haraway, there is no distinguished bodily autonomy of a woman. What constitutes being a woman is nearly too complex within sexual scientific discourse to even truly be determined. I feel this is especially relevant in our given time. Therefore, through the Cyborg we find that Haraway is purposefully creating a “subject” that does not fix others into stereotyped categories (Batian) The 21st century, from what I believe, is all for stripping societal norms, heterosexual norms and anything that has inadvertently been “written in stone”. 

Young Cyborgian Woman

To touch upon more of the “cyber” or “technological” portion of the cyberfeminism discussion, I want to discuss this matter in the light of Scott’s chapter. The discussion of the Cyborg is prominent, and although not to flip flop, I just want to briefly mention that Batian mentioned how the anger and frustration of achieving the cyborgian ways go undisclosed. Achieving this notion of duality that is the cyborg is not necessarily easily achieved. Scott talks about the idea of inauthentic and authentic identities that young women self-portray on an online surface. It has become more prominent over the years that social media is atrocious for young and developing women to be exposed to. Everyone online is playing a role as to what they want to portray about themselves online. Although all authentic to themselves, mimicking another’s self-portrayal is commonly practiced amongst the social media influencing community. Unfortunately, regardless of whether being private or public online, women will “always face the critique that they are performing inauthentically, even if they are attempting to present a persona that represents aspects of an authentic self” (Scott) Young women are especially vulnerable to the world that is online. They are not only experimenting and experiencing themselves for the first time, but they are also doing so with the influence of other self-portraying women. I feel this goes in hand with the idea of what even constitutes a “woman” or “female”. Not understanding the idea of being neutral or authentically yourself creates a scary place for a young woman online. An important paragraph from Scott’s chapters is here. To further elaborate I feel that Scott exemplifies the multiple factors that take place when a woman participates in social media. We are not all taught about the creation of the “Cyborg” nor when we know of the Cyborg are we (women) taught how to master the fluidity of it. However, I do feel as though in more recent years, women have been utilizing social media to protect their rights, bodies, and existence. Although there will always be cases of being mistaken for “inauthentic” cyberfeminism continues to grow and be more prevalent in the modern day. 

“Risks identified in media, policy, and theoretical debates on girls and young women and digital technology include (among others): surveillance by other online users, privacy risks, concerns related to self-disclosure (particularly in terms of future employment, sexual harassment, reputational damage, or constraints on higher education), potential sexualization and resulting miscellaneous threats to personal safety in response to self-images that are posted online, other reputational risks, body image risks related to internalization of gendered media representations, and cyberbullying and cyber gender harassment. Upon looking at each of these issues more deeply, however, it becomes clear that not all of these areas are exclusively sites of risk and constraint for girls in virtual spaces. Without discounting that for some they may indeed represent constraints upon agency or unrestricted use of virtual technology, for many girls and young women these areas can also facilitate liberation. Even when these areas do present certain constraints, research has shown that girls are aware of these constraints and are cognizant of potential online risk, proactively enacting strategies to independently manage them.” (Scott)