Implementing feminist theory in engineering: obstacles within the gender studies tradition

References

• Barad, Karen. 1998. “Getting Real: Technoscientific Practices and the Materialization of Reality.” Differences 10 (2): 87–128.
   Google Scholar
• Beddoes, Kacey. 2012. “Feminist Scholarship in Engineering Education: Challenges and Tensions.” Engineering Studies 4 (3): 205–232. doi: 10.1080/19378629.2012.693932
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beddoes, Kacey, and Maura Borrego. 2011. “Feminist Theory in Three Engineering Education Journals: 1995–2008.” Journal of Engineering Education 100 (2): 281–303. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00014.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canel, Annie, Ruth Oldenziel, Karin Zachmann. 2000. Crossing Boundaries, Building Bridges: Comparing the History of the Women Engineers 1870’s – 1990’s. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Connell, R.W. 1987. Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Connell, Raewyn. 2007. Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in Social Science. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Elfgren, Lennart, Kent Gylltoft, Håkan Sundquist, and Sven Thelandersson. 2012. “Byggnader som rasar växande problem i Sverige” [Collapsing Buildings a Growing Problem in SWEDEN]. Dagens Nyheter, September 4. Accessed September 4, 2013. http://www.dn.se/debatt/byggnader-som-rasar-vaxande-problem-i-sverige/.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013. Gendered Innovations: How Gender Analysis Contributes to Research. Report of the Expert Group “Innovation Through Gender”. Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Faulkner, Wendy. 2001. “The Technology Question in Feminism: A View from Feminist Technology Studies.” Women’s Studies International Forum 24 (1): 79–95. doi: 10.1016/S0277-5395(00)00166-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faulkner, Wendy. 2007. ““Nuts and Bolts and People”: Gender-Troubled Engineering Identities.” Social Studies of Science 37 (3): 331–356. doi: 10.1177/0306312706072175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grint, K., and S. Woolgar. 1995. “On Some Failures of Nerve in Constructivist and Feminist Analyses of Technology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 20 (3): 286–310. doi: 10.1177/016224399502000302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunnarsson, Ewa. 1994. “Att våga väga jämnt!—Om kvalifikationer och kvinnliga förhållningssätt i ett tekniskt industriarbete” [Daring To Be Equal— On Qualifications and Skills and Women’s Ways of Relating to Work in a Technical Industrial Field]. Dissertation, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå.
   Google Scholar
• Hacker, Sally. 1989. Pleasure, Power and Technology: Some Tales of Gender, Engineering, and the Cooperative Workplace. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, Donna. 1985. “A Manifesto for Cyborgs: Science, Technology and Socialist Feminism in the 1980s.” Socialist Review 80 (15:2): 65–107.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, Donna. 2004. The Haraway Reader. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harding, Sandra. 1986. The Science Question in Feminism. London: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kardon, Joshua B. 2005. “Concept of “Care” in Engineering.” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities 19 (3): 256–260. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2005)19:3(256)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1985. Reflections on Gender and Science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1992. Secrets of Life, Secrets of Death: Essays on Language, Gender and Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, Rosanne. 1994. “The Gorgeous Lesbian in LA Law: The Present Absence?” In The Good, the Bad and the Gorgeous: Popular Culture’s Romance with Lesbianism, edited by Diane Hamer and Belinda Budge, 132–141. London: Pandora.
   Google Scholar
• Kvande, Elin. 1999. “‘In the Belly of the Beast’: Constructing Femininities in Engineering Organizations.” European Journal of Women's Studies 6: 305–328. doi: 10.1177/135050689900600304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landström, Catharina. 2009. “Queering Feminist Technology Studies.” Feminist Theory 8 (1): 7–26. doi: 10.1177/1464700107074193
   Google Scholar
• Law, John. 1987. “Technology, Closure and Heterogeneous Engineering: The Case of the Portuguese Expansion.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems, edited by Wiebe Bijker, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 111–134. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meyerowitz, Joanne. 2008. “A History of “Gender”.” The American Historical Review 113 (5): 1346–1356. doi: 10.1086/ahr.113.5.1346
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mörtberg, Christina. 2003. “In Dreams Begins Responsibility – Feminist Alternatives to Technoscience.” In How Do We Make a Difference: Information Technology, Transnational Democracy and Gender, edited by Christina Mörtberg, Prijo Elovaara, and Agneta Lundgren, 57–69. Luleå: Printing Office Luleå University of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Pantazidou, Marina, and Indira Nair. 1999. “Ethic of Care: Guiding Principles for Engineering Teaching & Practice.” Journal of Engineering Education 88 (2): 205–212. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1999.tb00436.x
   Google Scholar
• Powell, Abigail, Barbara Bagilhole, and Andrew Dainty. 2009. “How Women Engineers do and Undo Gender: Consequences for Gender Equality.” Gender, Work and Organization 16 (4): 411–428. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00406.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prokop, Ulrike. 1981a. Kvinnors livssammanhang: Begränsade strategier och omåttliga önskningar. Stockholm: Tema Nova. (German original, “Weiblicher Lebenszusammenhang. Von der Beschränktheit der Strategien und der Unangemessenheit der Wünsche”, published in Frankfurt 1976).
   Google Scholar
• Prokop, Ulrike. 1981b. Produktion, produktivkrafter och produktionsförhållanden i kvinnors livssammanhang. [Production, Productive Forces, and The Conditions for Production in Women’s Life Context]. Kvinnovetenskaplig tidskrift 1–2 (1982): 55–90.
   Google Scholar
• Riley, Donna. 2013. “Hidden in Plain View: Feminists Doing Engineering Ethics, Engineers Doing Feminist Ethics.” Science and Engineering Ethics 19: 189–206. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9320-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rommes, Els, Corinna Bath, and Susanne Maass. 2012. “Methods for Intervention: Gender Analysis and Feminist Design of ICT.” Science, Technology & Human Values 37 (6): 653–662. doi: 10.1177/0162243912450343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rydhagen, Birgitta. 2002. “Feminist Sanitary Engineering in Vioolsdrif, South Africa.” Gender, Technology and Development 6 (2): 249–267. doi: 10.1177/097185240200600205
   Google Scholar
• Saarinen, Aino. 1989. Kvinnoforskningens interventionsprojekt – problem och utmaningar [The Intervention Project of Feminist Research: Problems and Challenges]. Kvinnovetenskaplig tidskrift 3–4: 62–74.
   Google Scholar
• Sánchez de Madariaga, Inés. 2010. “Mobility of Care: Introducing New Concepts in Urban Transport.” In Fair Shared Cities: The Impact of Gender Planning in Europe, edited by Inés Sánchez de Madariaga and Marion Roberts, 33–48. Farnham, UK and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, Vandana. 1988. Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. New Delhi: Kali for Women, Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, Bjørg Aase. 1982. “Ansvarsrasjonalitet: Om mål-middeltenkning blant kvinner: Kvinner i felleskap.” [Responsible Rationality: About Ends-Means Thinking Among Women: Women in Community]. In Kvinners levevilkår og livsløp [Women’s Living Conditions and Life Cycles], edited by Holter Harriet, 392–402. Oslo: Universitetsførlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Sørensen, Knut. 1992. “Towards a Feminized Technology? Gendered Values in the Construction of Technology.” Social Studies of Science 22 (1): 5–31. doi: 10.1177/0306312792022001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suchman, Lucy. 2005. “Agencies in Technology Design: Feminist Reconfigurations.” Lancaster University. Workshop on Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering, Stanford University, April 15–16, 2005. PDF file: http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/sociology/papers/suchman-agenciestechnodesign.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Tronto, Joan C. 2009. Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. New York: Routledge. Originally published 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Ve, Hildur. 1989. “Kvinnor, byråkrati och välfärdsstat.” [Women, Bureaucracy and Well-Fare State]. Sociologisk forskning nr. 4/1989.
   Google Scholar
• Ve, Hildur. 1994. “Gender Differences in Rationality: The Concept of Praxis Knowledge and Future Trends.” In Feminist Voices on Gender, Technology and Ethics, edited by Ewa Gunnarsson and Lena Trojer, 43–55. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology, Centre for Women’s Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Vehviläinen, Marja. 1997. “Gender, Expertise and Information Technology.” Doctoral thesis A-1997-1, Tammerfors University.
   Google Scholar
• Wærness, Kari. 1977. Likestilling, nærmiljø og sociale hjelpetilltak: Kvinners bilde [Equality, Communities and Social Support: Women’s Views]. Oslo: Pax Förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Wærness, Kari. 1984. The Rationality of Caring: Economic and Industrial Democracy. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wajcman, Judy. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wajcman, Judy. 2000. “Reflections on Gender and Technology Studies: In What State is the Art?” Social Studies of Science 30 (3): 447–464. doi: 10.1177/030631200030003005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldén, Louise. 1982. “Teknikkulturens dubbla förtecken” [Male Culture, Female Culture and Technological Culture]. Kvinnovetenskaplig Tidskrift, 3, 15–24.
   Google Scholar
• Wander, Maxi. 1978. “Guten Morgen, du schöne. Frauen in der DDR.” Protokolle. Darmstadt, Neuwied: Luchterhand.
   Google Scholar