Tara Whelan
ABSTRACT
This paper draws from a critical examination of media and literature surrounding the maker movement, and interviews with 10 women engaged in maker activities. It aims to explore the barriers to women's participation in the maker movement and, in particular, the barriers to women's adoption of a maker identity. Three phenomena are discussed; firstly the problematic disjunct between inclusivity of maker rhetoric and hierarchies in maker practice. Secondly, how the purported eclecticism of materials and techniques in the maker movement may actually lessen the likelihood of women self-identifying as makers. Thirdly, how women tend to have a qualitatively different approach to technological practice as compared to their male peers and the subtle ways in which this runs counter to normative maker values. I suggest that minimising the identity-centric approach of the maker movement may help to ameliorate these barriers, but ultimately, more research must be undertaken to verify or challenge the conclusions drawn here.
- Intel/Harris Poll. (2014). MakeHers: Engaging girls and women in technology through making, creating, and inventing. Retrieved February 2018 from http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/ en/documents/reports/Makers-report-girlswomen.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Catherine Ashcraft, Brad McLain, and Elizabeth Eger. 2016. Women in Tech: The Facts. Retrieved February 2018 from https://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/resources /womenintech_facts_fullreport_05132016.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Dale Dougherty. 2016. Free to make: How The Maker Movement is Changing Our Schools, Our Jobs, And Our Minds. North Atlantic Books. Pg 3Google Scholar
- Chris Anderson. 2012. Makers: The New Industrial Revolution. Random House Business Books. Pg. 13Google Scholar
- Make Media. 2016. 2016 Make: Media Kit Retrieved February 2018 from http://makermedia.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/01/2016-Make-Media-KitFinal.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Gui Cavalcanti. 2013. Is it a Hackerspace, Makerspace, TechShop, or FabLab? Retrieved February 2018 from https://makezine.com/2013/05/22/the-differencebetween-hackerspaces-makerspaces-techshopsand-fablabs/Google Scholar
- Leah Buechley. 2014. Thinking About Making. Eyeo Festival Keynote. Retrieved February 2018 from https://vimeo.com/110616469Google Scholar
- Susan Faulkner. 2014. Women who make: Undercounted as Makers and underwhelmed by Makerspaces. Computer, 47(12), 30--31Google Scholar
- Liz Henry. 2014. The Rise of Feminist Hackerspaces and How to Make Your Own. Model View Culture 2Google Scholar
- Daniela K. Rosner, Morgan Ames and Sarah E. Fox. 2016. What Happened to Craft:? Surfacing Alternate Histories of Digital Fabrication and Community in the Maker Movement Retrieved February 2018 from https://hci.sbg.ac.at/wpcontent/uploads/2015/11/What_happened_to_Craf t.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Mark Hatch. 2013. The Maker Movement Manifesto: Rules for Innovation in The New World of Crafters, Hackers, and Tinkerers. McGraw Hill Professional.Google Scholar
- Dale Dougherty. 2009. CRAFT: Volume 10 is Our Last Issue in Print Retrieved February 2018 from https://makezine.com/2009/02/11/craft_volume_1 0_is_our_last_is/Google Scholar
- Paul McFedries. 2007. Technically Speaking: The Hobbyist Renaissance. IEEE Spectrum 44(6), pp. 88. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Susan J. Douglas. 1989. Inventing American Broadcasting, 1899--1922. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Kirsten Haring. 2007. Ham radio's Technical Culture. MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Susan Faulkner and Anne McClard. 2014. Making change: Can ethnographic research about women makers change the future of computing?. In Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, pp. 187--198).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dale Dougherty. 2013. The Maker Mindset: Design, Make, Play. Routledge.Google Scholar
- M. Gail Jones, Laura Brader-Araje, Lisa Wilson Carboni, Glenda Carter, Melissa J. Rua, Eric Banilower and Holly Hatch. Tool time: Gender and Students' Use of Tools, Control, and Authority. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 37, 8 (2000), 760--783.Google Scholar
- Anna M. Martinson. 2006. Designing GenderSensitive Computer Games to Close the Gender Gap in Technology. In Removing barriers: Women in Academic Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Jill M. Bystydzienski and Sharon R. Bird (Eds) Indiana University Press. 271--280Google Scholar
- Marja Van Den Heuvel-Panheizen. 1999. Girls' and boys' problems: Gender differences in solving problems in primary school mathematics in the Netherlands. In Learning and Teaching Mathematics: An International Perspective, T. Nunes and P. Bryant (Eds.), 223--253. Psychology PressGoogle Scholar
Index Terms
- We Are Not All Makers: The Paradox of Plurality In The Maker Movement
Recommendations
More than the Sum of Makers: The Complex Dynamics of Diverse Practices at Maker Faire
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsHuman Computer Interaction has developed great interest in the Maker Movement. Previous work has explored it from various perspectives, focusing either on its potentials or issues. As these are however only fragmented portrayals, this paper aims to take ...
Deconstructing sociotechnical identity in maker cultures
GenderIT '18: Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Gender & ITIn this paper we argue that Makers engage in various degrees of sociotechnical identity formation. We explore the role of gender in maker identity formation and how the masculine characteristics of maker spaces create challenges for feminine identity ...
Gender, Simulation, and Gaming: Research Review and Redirections
This review of gender and gameplay research over the past three decades documents a set of persistent methodological repetitions that have systematically impeded its progress since the inception of this trajectory of research. The first is, in fact, a ...
Comments