Cyberfeminism and Artificial Life

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Cyberfeminism and Artificial Life Cyberfeminism and Artificial Life ‘A wonderful work which, for the first time ever, balances an even handed weaving together of A-Life and cognitive science alongside evolutionary biology, cultural studies and feminist theory. Sarah Kember’s adroit mastery of such an astonishing range of sources is an incredible achievement – not least because she is equally at home with all of them and, importantly, has excellent powers of exposition to reach all of these audiences.’ Alison Adam, Salford University Cyberfeminism and Artificial Life examines the construction, manipulation and redefinition of life in contemporary technoscientific culture. The book takes a critical political view of the concept of life as information, and traces it through the new biology and the discourse of genomics incorporating the changing discipline of Artificial Life and its manifestation in art, language, literature, com- merce and entertainment. Using examples from cloning to computer games, and incorporating an analysis of hardware, software and ‘wetware’, Sarah Kember demonstrates how this relatively marginal field connects with – and connects up – global networks of information systems. Refocusing concern on the ethics, rather than the ‘nature’ of life-as-it-could-be, Kember proposes that Artificial Life is in part an adaptation to the climate of opposition surrounding Artificial Intelligence. From a feminist perspective, and with a set of concerns related to the role of the body, the self and the species in the production of life-as-it-could-be, Kember points to a strategy for change that rests on a dialogue between ‘nature’ and ‘culture’, ontology and epistemology, science and the humanities. Sarah Kember is a senior lecturer in the Department of Media and Communica- tions at Goldsmiths College, University of London. She is the author of Virtual Anxiety. Photography, New Technologies and Subjectivity, 1998. Cyberfeminism and Artificial Life Sarah Kember First published 2003 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003. © 2003 Sarah Kember All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN 0-203-29915-9 Master e-book ISBN ISBN 0-203-16345-1 (Adobe eReader Format) ISBN 0-415-24026-3 (hbk) ISBN 0-415-24027-1 (pbk) Contents Preface vii Acknowledgements xi 1 Autonomy and artificiality in global networks 1 ALife in context, or, the ‘return to Darwin’ 2 Network bioethics 7 2 The meaning of life part 1: the new biology 14 Evolutionary biology – all about chickens and eggs 14 The metaphor of life as information 16 Biology as ideology – reductionism and determinism 19 Molecular biology – an endgame 23 Sociobiology and eugenics 31 Evolutionary psychology and the ‘Darwin Wars’ 40 3 Artificial Life 53 ‘Information Wants to be Alive!’ 60 The philosophy and biology of ALife 63 ALife’s autonomous agents 66 ALife’s non-vitalist vitalism 71 Spaces of dissent 71 The future of ALife – consolidating (digital) naturalism 78 4 CyberLife’s Creatures 83 SimWorlds – ALife and computer games 85 Stirring the primordial soup 85 The Creation part 1: making worlds 86 The Creation part 2: making life 88 Cain’s creation 89 Creatures 91 Playing the game 95 Creatures on the Internet 98 vi Contents CyberLife – selling ALife 105 CyberLife Research Limited – or ‘real’ ALife 109 5 Network identities 116 Artificial agents 116 HAL 116 Situated and autonomous robots 118 Bots 124 ALife aesthetics 127 Artificial cultures 133 Artificial societies 138 Artificial subjects 143 6 The meaning of life part 2: genomics 145 Artificial life as wetware 145 The species-self 150 Confessions of a justified sinner 150 The self as other 160 The other species 169 7 Evolving feminism in Alife environments 175 Alife-as-we-know-it 175 Natureculture 182 Risk 188 Pengi and the Expressivator 193 Alife-as-it-could-be 198 Autopoiesis and autonomy 198 Embodying Alife 204 Towards situating Alife 206 8 Beyond the science wars 211 Notes 217 Bibliography 227 Index 243 Preface This book aims to do two things: to trace the development of identities and entities within the global information network encompassing both human and non-human environments, and to offer a pluralised cyberfeminist engagement with artificial life as both a discipline and cultural discourse. As a cultural discourse, artificial life (alife) is more than a development of artificial intelligence (AI) which seeks similar goals by means of inverse methods and philosophies. As a cultural discourse, artificial life is both a descriptor of posthuman life-as-we- know-it and a predictor of posthuman life-as-it-could-be. The posthuman is cyborgian in the sense of its enmeshment, at all levels of materiality and metaphor, with information, communication and biotechnologies and with other non- human actors. The two terms are, however, not synonymous and while they describe a similar ontology (a hybridisation of organic and inorganic forms and processes) and epistemology (a transgression of the boundaries sustaining Modern Western thought, principally those of nature and culture), they do not necessarily share a politics, history or ethics. The discourse of artificial life is informed if not contained by a discipline which developed precisely at the end of the cold war and which rejected the militarist top-down command and control and the masculinist instrumental principles of AI. The cyborg which Donna Haraway (1991a) so astutely parodied in her manifesto was the product of cold war AI. Out of this comes a new discipline based on the principles of decentralised distributed control, bottom-up self-organisation and emergence. These are at once technical principles relating to the development of embodied intelligence and, obviously, socially and historically contingent political principles governing individuals and communities. The posthuman which I wish to explore here is a product of post-cold-war ALife and it has at its heart (or soul) a fundamental anti- instrumentalism. The posthuman which the discourse of artificial life both describes and prescribes is, to a large extent, posthumanised, and as such demands a bioethics of posthumanism which is yet to be articulated. Chris Hables Gray (2002) has outlined a cyborg bill of rights (an amendment of the US Consti- tution) in his suggestive exploration of cyborg citizenship. But where this is based on a model of human agency, the posthumanist bioethics which is sought here is emergent in the inter- or ‘intra-actions’ (Barad 2000) of network (id)entities or viii Preface artificial life-forms manifested in software (as computer programs), hardware (as robots) and wetware (as bio- and genetically engineered organisms). It is custo- mary, in the short history of debates on artificial life to restrict the analysis to forms of software and hardware and to the language and discourse which generates and is generated by these forms. This book breaks with that custom by emphasising the dual constitution of artificial life as both computer science and biology, and by highlighting the increasing hegemony of biological discourse within the discipline of ALife and within technoscientific culture generally (Haraway 2000). Embodied computer programs, situated autonomous robots and transgenic organisms co-exist within the global network as kin, sharing the ‘bodily fluids’ (Haraway 1997) or the life-blood of information. Moreover, these entities or beings are provisional, experimental, in the process of becoming. They can only indicate, but they do indicate some key parameters of posthuman identity. They are both beings in themselves and a means of working out what may be and who may be in the future. They are the literal manifestations and the creative imaginings of artificial life which is, by definition, at the boundary between nature and culture. To the distant gaze of cyberfeminism, artificial life seems to retreat from this precarious boundary position and engage in a form of renaturalisation by creating artificial entities in artificial worlds governed solely by Darwinian evolutionary principles. In the convergence between biology and computer science, it is the biology which speaks more loudly, and seems to speak more clearly to the feminist. From a distance, Artificial Life certainly looks like ‘sociobiology in computational clothing’ (Adam 1998) and Alison Adam was right to point out the dangers of a discourse which subsumes cultural into biological explanations of life. But the challenge for cyberfeminism – which, like other aspects of feminism, has had to interrogate its own relation to biological discourse through the problems of universalism and essentialism – is to recognise the plurality of positions which simultaneously undermine and strengthen not just its own case but that of its supposed adversary. There is no ‘biology’ any more than there is a homogenous ‘feminism’. What fails immediately on the recognition
Recommended publications
  • Revisiting Cyberfeminism
    AUTHOR’S COPY | AUTORENEXEMPLAR Revisiting cyberfeminism SUSANNA PAASONEN E-mail: [email protected] Abstract In the early 1990s, cyberfeminism surfaced as an arena for critical analyses of the inter-connections of gender and new technology Ϫ especially so in the context of the internet, which was then emerging as something of a “mass-medium”. Scholars, activists and artists interested in media technol- ogy and its gendered underpinnings formed networks and groups. Conse- quently, they attached altering sets of meaning to the term cyberfeminism that ranged in their take on, and identifications with feminism. Cyberfemi- nist activities began to fade in the early 2000s and the term has since been used by some as synonymous with feminist studies of new media Ϫ yet much is also lost in such a conflation. This article investigates the histories of cyberfeminism from two interconnecting perspectives. First, it addresses the meanings of the prefix “cyber” in cyberfeminism. Second, it asks what kinds of critical and analytical positions cyberfeminist networks, events, projects and publications have entailed. Through these two perspectives, the article addresses the appeal and attraction of cyberfeminism and poses some tentative explanations for its appeal fading and for cyberfeminist activities being channelled into other networks and practiced under dif- ferent names. Keywords: cyberfeminism, gender, new technology, feminism, networks Introduction Generally speaking, cyberfeminism signifies feminist appropriation of information and computer technology (ICT) on a both practical and theoretical level. Critical analysis and rethinking of gendered power rela- tions related to digital technologies has been a mission of scholars but equally Ϫ and vocally Ϫ that of artists and activists, and those working in-between and across such categorizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberfeminism : Encyclopedia of New Media
    Cyberfeminism Cyberfeminism is a term coined in 1994 by Sadie Plant, director of the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit at the University of Warwick in Britain, to describe the work of feminists interested in theorizing, critiquing, and exploiting the Internet, cyberspace, and new-media technologies in general. The term and movement grew out of “third-wave” feminism, the contemporary feminist movement that follows the “second-wave” feminism of the 1970s, which focused on equal rights for women, and which itself followed the “first-wave” feminism of the early 20th century, which concentrated on woman suffrage. Cyberfeminism has tended to include mostly younger, technologically savvy women, and those from Western, white, middle-class backgrounds. The ranks of cyberfeminists are growing, however, and along with this increase is a growing divergence of ideas about what constitutes cyberfeminist thought and action. Prior to the advent of cyberfeminism, feminist study of technology tended to examine technological developments as socially and culturally constructed. One major argument was that technology has been positioned as part of masculine culture—something that men are interested in, good at, and therefore engage in more than women. Even though women throughout history have been active in developing new technologies, feminists have argued that technology has still been looked upon as a masculine creation. For example, although women had been involved in the creation and development of the computer, their contributions were largely marginalized, and their participation often ignored or written out of history. Therefore, feminists such as Judy Wacjman, a professor of sociology at the Australian National University in Canberra, and Cynthia Cockburn, an independent scholar and activist in London, argued that technology needed to be continually interrogated and re-conceptualized, and that women needed to become more active in technological areas as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological, Ethical and Design Issues
    OII / e-Horizons Forum Discussion Paper No. 14, January 2008 Close Engagements with Artificial Companions: Key Social, Psychological, Ethical and Design Issues by Malcolm Peltu Oxford Internet Institute Yorick Wilks Oxford Internet Institute OII / e-Horizons Forum Discussion Paper No. 14 Oxford Internet Institute University of Oxford 1 St Giles, Oxford OX1 3JS United Kingdom Forum Discussion Paper January 2008 © University of Oxford for the Oxford Internet Institute 2008 Close Engagements with Artificial Companions Foreword This paper summarizes discussions at the multidisciplinary forum1 held at the University of Oxford on 26 October 2007 entitled Artificial Companions in Society: Perspectives on the Present and Future, as well as an open meeting the previous day addressed by Sherry Turkle2. The event was organized by Yorick Wilks, Senior Research Fellow for the Oxford Internet Institute (OII)3, on behalf of the e-Horizons Institute4 and in association with the EU Integrated Project COMPANIONS. COMPANIONS is studying conversational software-based artificial agents that will get to know their owners over a substantial period. These could be developed to advise, comfort and carry out a wide range of functions to support diverse personal and social needs, such as to be ‘artificial companions’ for the elderly, helping their owners to learn, or assisting to sustain their owners’ fitness and health. The invited forum participants, including computer and social scientists, also discussed a range of related developments that use advanced artificial intelligence and human– computer interaction approaches. They examined key issues in building artificial companions, emphasizing their social, personal, emotional and ethical implications. This paper summarizes the main issues raised.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Problems in Artificial Life
    Open Problems in Artificial Life Mark A. Bedau,† John S. McCaskill‡ Norman H. Packard§ Steen Rasmussen Chris Adami†† David G. Green‡‡ Takashi Ikegami§§ Abstract This article lists fourteen open problems in Kunihiko Kaneko artificial life, each of which is a grand challenge requiring a Thomas S. Ray††† major advance on a fundamental issue for its solution. Each problem is briefly explained, and, where deemed helpful, some promising paths to its solution are indicated. Keywords artificial life, evolution, self-organi- zation, emergence, self-replication, autopoeisis, digital life, artificial chemistry, selection, evolutionary learning, ecosystems, biosystems, astrobiology, evolvable hardware, dynamical hierarchies, origin of life, simulation, cultural evolution, 1 Introduction information theory At the dawn of the last century, Hilbert proposed a set of open mathematical problems. They proved to be an extraordinarily effective guideline for mathematical research in the following century. Based on a substantial body of existing mathematical theory, the challenges were both precisely formulated and positioned so that a significant body of missing theory needed to be developed to achieve their solution, thereby enriching mathematics as a whole. In contrast with mathematics, artificial life is quite young and essentially interdis- ciplinary. The phrase “artificial life” was coined by C. Langton [11], who envisaged an investigation of life as it is in the context of life as it could be. Although artificial life is fundamentally directed towards both the origins of biology and its future, the scope and complexity of its subject require interdisciplinary cooperation and collabo- ration. This broadly based area of study embraces the possibility of discovering lifelike behavior in unfamiliar settings and creating new and unfamiliar forms of life, and its major aim is to develop a coherent theory of life in all its manifestations, rather than an historically contingent documentation bifurcated by discipline.
    [Show full text]
  • Open-Endedness for the Sake of Open-Endedness
    Open-Endedness for the Sake Arend Hintze Michigan State University of Open-Endedness Department of Integrative Biology Department of Computer Science and Engineering BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action [email protected] Abstract Natural evolution keeps inventing new complex and intricate forms and behaviors. Digital evolution and genetic algorithms fail to create the same kind of complexity, not just because we still lack the computational resources to rival nature, but Keywords because (it has been argued) we have not understood in principle how to create open-ended evolving systems. Much effort has been Open-ended evolution, computational model, complexity, diversity made to define such open-endedness so as to create forms of increasing complexity indefinitely. Here, however, a simple evolving computational system that satisfies all such requirements is presented. Doing so reveals a shortcoming in the definitions for open-ended evolution. The goal to create models that rival biological complexity remains. This work suggests that our current definitions allow for even simple models to pass as open-ended, and that our definitions of complexity and diversity are more important for the quest of open-ended evolution than the fact that something runs indefinitely. 1 Introduction Open-ended evolution has been identified as a key challenge in artificial life research [4]. Specifically, it has been acknowledged that there is a difference between an open-ended system and a system that just has a long run time. Large or slow systems will eventually converge on a solution, but open- ended systems will not and instead keep evolving. Interestingly, a system that oscillates or that is in a dynamic equilibrium [21] would continuously evolve, but does not count as an open-ended evolving system.
    [Show full text]
  • First Cyberfeminist International
    editorial In September 1997 the First Cyberfeminist International Who is OBN and what do they do? took place in the Hybrid Workspace at Documenta X, in The Old Boys Network was founded in Berlin in spring Kassel, Germany. 37 women from 12 countries partici- 1997 by Susanne Ackers, Julianne Pierce, Valentina pated. It was the first big meeting of cyberfeminists Djordjevic, Ellen Nonnenmacher and Cornelia Sollfrank. organized by the Old Boys Network (OBN), the first inter- OBN consists of a core-group of 3-5 women, who take national cyberfeminist organisation. responsibility for administrative and organisational tasks, and a worldwide network of associated members. OBN is dedicated to Cyberfeminism. Although cyber- feminism has not been clearly defined--or perhaps OBN’s concern is to build spaces in which we can because it hasn't--the concept has enormous potential. research, experiment, communicate and act. One Cyberfeminism offers many women--including those example is the infrastructure which is being built by weary of same-old feminism--a new vantage point from OBN. It consists of a cyberfeminist Server (currently which to formulate innovative theory and practice, and under construction), the OBN mailing list and the orga- at the same time, to reflect upon traditional feminist nisation of Real-Life meetings. All this activities have the theory and pratice. purpose to give a contextualized presence to different artistic and political formulations under the umbrella of The concept of Cyberfeminism immediately poses a lot Cyberfeminism. Furthermore we create and use different of questions. The most important ones are: 1. What is kinds of spaces, spaces which are more abstract.
    [Show full text]
  • Artificial Intelligence: How Does It Work, Why Does It Matter, and What Can We Do About It?
    Artificial intelligence: How does it work, why does it matter, and what can we do about it? STUDY Panel for the Future of Science and Technology EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Philip Boucher Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA) PE 641.547 – June 2020 EN Artificial intelligence: How does it work, why does it matter, and what can we do about it? Artificial intelligence (AI) is probably the defining technology of the last decade, and perhaps also the next. The aim of this study is to support meaningful reflection and productive debate about AI by providing accessible information about the full range of current and speculative techniques and their associated impacts, and setting out a wide range of regulatory, technological and societal measures that could be mobilised in response. AUTHOR Philip Boucher, Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA), This study has been drawn up by the Scientific Foresight Unit (STOA), within the Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (EPRS) of the Secretariat of the European Parliament. To contact the publisher, please e-mail [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSION Original: EN Manuscript completed in June 2020. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the European Parliament is given prior notice and sent a copy.
    [Show full text]
  • How Artificial Intelligence Works
    BRIEFING How artificial intelligence works From the earliest days of artificial intelligence (AI), its definition focused on how its results appear to show intelligence, rather than the methods that are used to achieve it. Since then, AI has become an umbrella term which can refer to a wide range of methods, both current and speculative. It applies equally well to tools that help doctors to identify cancer as it does to self-replicating robots that could enslave humanity centuries from now. Since AI is simultaneously represented as high-risk, low-risk and everything in between, it is unsurprising that it attracts controversy. This briefing provides accessible introductions to some of the key techniques that come under the AI banner, grouped into three sections to give a sense the chronology of its development. The first describes early techniques, described as 'symbolic AI' while the second focuses on the 'data driven' approaches that currently dominate, and the third looks towards possible future developments. By explaining what is 'deep' about deep learning and showing that AI is more maths than magic, the briefing aims to equip the reader with the understanding they need to engage in clear-headed reflection about AI's opportunities and challenges, a topic that is discussed in the companion briefing, Why artificial intelligence matters. First wave: Symbolic artificial intelligence Expert systems In these systems, a human expert creates precise rules that a computer can follow, step by step, to decide how to respond to a given situation. The rules are often expressed in an 'if-then-else' format. Symbolic AI can be said to 'keep the human in the loop' because the decision-making process is closely aligned to how human experts make decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Computation: a Road
    918 Biological Computation: A Road to Complex Engineered Systems Nelson Alfonso Gómez-Cruz Modeling and Simulation Laboratory Universidad del Rosario Bogotá, Colombia [email protected] Carlos Eduardo Maldonado Research Professor Universidad del Rosario Bogotá, Colombia [email protected] Provided that there is no theoretical frame for complex engineered systems (CES) as yet, this paper claims that bio-inspired engineering can help provide such a frame. Within CES bio- inspired systems play a key role. The disclosure from bio-inspired systems and biological computation has not been sufficiently worked out, however. Biological computation is to be taken as the processing of information by living systems that is carried out in polynomial time, i.e., efficiently; such processing however is grasped by current science and research as an intractable problem (for instance, the protein folding problem). A remark is needed here: P versus NP problems should be well defined and delimited but biological computation problems are not. The shift from conventional engineering to bio-inspired engineering needs bring the subject (or problem) of computability to a new level. Within the frame of computation, so far, the prevailing paradigm is still the Turing-Church thesis. In other words, conventional 919 engineering is still ruled by the Church-Turing thesis (CTt). However, CES is ruled by CTt, too. Contrarily to the above, we shall argue here that biological computation demands a more careful thinking that leads us towards hypercomputation. Bio-inspired engineering and CES thereafter, must turn its regard toward biological computation. Thus, biological computation can and should be taken as the ground for engineering complex non-linear systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9201665 Tbward a feminist identity: Contemporary Mexican-American women novelists Gonz&lez, Marfa Carmen, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1991 Copyright ©1991 by GonzAlez, Marfa Carmen.
    [Show full text]
  • THE BEAUTIFUL WARRIORS Technofeminist Praxis in the Twenty-First Century
    Minor Compositions Open Access Statement – Please Read This book is open access. This work is not simply an electronic book; it is the open access version of a work that exists in a number of forms, the traditional printed form being one of them. All Minor Compositions publications are placed for free, in their entirety, on the web. This is because the free and autonomous sharing of knowledges and experiences is important, especially at a time when the restructuring and increased centralization of book distribution makes it difficult (and expensive) to distribute radical texts effectively. The free posting of these texts does not mean that the necessary energy and labor to produce them is no longer there. One can think of buying physical copies not as the purchase of commodities, but as a form of support or solidarity for an approach to knowledge production and engaged research (particularly when purchasing directly from the publisher). The open access nature of this publication means that you can: • read and store this document free of charge • distribute it for personal use free of charge • print sections of the work for personal use • read or perform parts of the work in a context where no financial transactions take place However, it is against the purposes of Minor Compositions open access approach to: • gain financially from the work • sell the work or seek monies in relation to the distribution of the work • use the work in any commercial activity of any kind • profit a third party indirectly via use or distribution of the work • distribute in or through a commercial body (with the exception of academic usage within educational institutions) The intent of Minor Compositions as a project is that any surpluses generated from the use of collectively produced literature are intended to return to further the development and production of further publications and writing: that which comes from the commons will be used to keep cultivating those commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberfeminist Theories and the Benefits of Teaching Cyberfeminist Literature
    12 Cyberfeminist Theories and the Benefits of Teaching Cyberfeminist Literature Maya Zalbidea Paniagua Camilo José Cela University of Madrid Spain 1. Introduction In 2010 I had the opportunity to interview Julianne Pierce, writer and artist who took part of the first cyberfeminist group called VNS Matrix, at the conference "Riot Girls Techno Queen: the Rise of Laptop Generation Women" at the Reina Sofía Museum in Madrid. When I asked her what she thought about present day cyberfeminism she answered melancholically: "Cyberfeminist movements are not as visible as they used to be during the 90s" ("Personal Interview with Julianne Pierce by Maya Zalbidea Paniagua" n/p) It is certainly true that the 80s and 90s supposed the golden age of cybercultures. Cybernetics arrived in the 1960s (Wiener 1968) but the glorious age of the Internet started in the 80s. In 1984 William Gibson coined the term cyberspace and anticipated the Internet revolution in his novel Neuromancer (1984). Other cyberpunk novels also illustrated a post-apocalyptic future such as: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968) by Philip K. Dick. Cyberpunk films such as Blade Runner (1982) and The Terminator (1984) received enormous impact. And some years later the Web was invented by British scientist Tim Berners-Lee in 1989, CERN publicized the new World Wide Web project in 1991, and during the 90s cyberfeminist theories and movements spread internationally. Unfortunately a climax of disillusion and a crisis of moral values has influenced negatively cyberfeminist thought, promoted by the idea that women in the third world cannot have access to the Internet, the battle between ecofeminists and cyberfeminists, and the ecological awareness of the difficulty to eliminate electronic garbage.
    [Show full text]