Search Results for:

Do Better

Doing better means both being aware of the tools you can leverage to help keep yourself safe in digital spaces and making sure that you are not harming others with your digital practices. Below are a list of our favorite tips and tools, followed by a more general list of resource links.

csov_logo_web_cropped

Our Favorites for Self-Protection

Tactical Tech’s Security-in-a-Box “Although the toolkit was designed primarily to address the growing needs of advocates in the global South – particularly human rights defenders – the software guides and security strategies in this toolkit are relevant to everyone; specifically people working with sensitive information. This may include vulnerable minorities, independent journalists or whistleblowers, as well as advocates working on a range of issues, from environmental justice to anti-corruption.”

Safe Hub Collective’s DIY Guide to Feminist Cybersecurity “You have a right to exist safely in digital spaces. Although we have to rely on outside parties for technology to access these spaces, there are tons of helpful tools and strategies that allow you to take greater control of your digital life and mitigate the risk of malicious threats. We’ll walk through common areas of digital life such as web browsing, private data, and smartphones to show you different ways that you can implement as much or little security as you’re comfortable with. You have power to set boundaries and protections in your digital spaces as you see fit: we hope that this guide will help you to make informed, personal decisions on what is right for you.”

Take Back the Tech’s Safety Toolkit: “We’ve looked at some of the ways tech-related violence occurs, how it violates your rights and what strategies you can use to protect yourself. Here we recommend tried and tested tools for keeping your computer and mobile phone as secure as possible. Most of the tools are free and/or open-source software (known as FLOSS). This software is usually much safer than closed, or proprietary, software created by Microsoft or Apple because it has been independently verified to ensure that it complies with the highest security standards. For that reason, we recommend Android and PC over Apple, though many of the tools we list can be used with either.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Surveillance Self-Defense.

See also Locking Down Your Digital Identity

csov_logo_web_cropped

Our Favorites To Ensure You’re Not Harming Others

Dorothy Kim and Eunsong Kim’s Twitter Ethics Manifesto

SOCIAL MEDIA ETHICS IN THE CLASSROOM DOWNLOADABLE PDF

The Social Media Ethics handout was created by Digital Alchemy and collaborators and produced by CSOV. The supplementary materials, including the social media ethics videos (coming soon!), were produced by CSOV and coordinated by T.L. Cowan and Moya Bailey.

POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL AND RESPECT WHEEL FOR ONLINE ENGAGEMENT

Digital Alchemy created two powerful graphic tools, The Respect Wheel and The Power and Control Wheel, to help people understand the dynamics of social media violence. Inspired by the Power and Control Wheels used in domestic violence settings, the Power and Control wheel details different kinds of online violence. The Respect wheel details the kinds of questions we should all be asking ourselves when using social media content or engaging social media users.

Control-colorThe Respect Wheel

In addition to the graphic pages, Digital Alchemy and CSOV produced a downloadable Power and Respect handout with both the wheels and a narrative discussion of the issues of power, control, and respect online.

ReThink (Trisha Prabhu)

You Asked: How do I deal with online harassment? How do I help the targets of online harassment? (Ashe Dryden)

Conference anti-harassment/Policy resources (Geek Feminism Wiki)

General Resources (see also our resources in the sidebar)

Online Safety in Brazil (SaferNet)

Technology Safety (National Network to End Domestic Violence)

On Guard Online (Federal Trade Commission)

Guide to Internet Security (Consumer Reports)

Resources specifically about children/teenagers

Common Sense Education on E-rate and CIPA: Toolkit for Teachers (Common Sense Media)

Internet Safety Toolkit (Center on Media and Childhealth)

Anti-Harassment, Intimidation and Bullying Resources (Safer Schools Ohio)

Cyberbullying & Digital/Internet Safety (OSPI, State of Washington)

Resources specifically for women

Online Safety Toolkit (Status of Women Canada and National Crime Prevention Strategy)

Twitter’s Abuse Problem: Now With Actual Solutions And Science (Women, Action, & the Media)

TEDxWomen Talk about Online Harassment & Cyber Mobs (Feminist Frequency)

Resources for journalists/bloggers

Tips and tools for journalists to deal with online harassment (Natasha Tynes)

International Press Institute: The Global Network for Media Freedom

Press Freedom Online (Committee to Protect Journalists)

Center for Solutions to Online Violence

csov_logo_web_mod

helping people safely navigate digital experiences and understand the impacts of and responses to online violence

SELECT A USER PROFILE BELOW TO START EXPLORING OUR CONTENT AND/OR GETTING HELP

Survivor
Have you ever been or are you currently experiencing online violence? Here are resources intended to help navigate targeted harassment online.
Educator
Are you looking to educate and inform others about how they can proactively avoid either becoming an online target or a harasser? Key resources for a range of ages and contexts can be found here.
Journalist
On this page we are collecting posts from CSOV collaborators who are writing about research ethics and social media in the context of contemporary journalistic practices.
Do Better
Are you worried your behavior is negatively impacting people or are you looking for general ideas about how to have a healthier online presence for both yourself and others? Here are some places where you can start.
Locking Down Your Digital Identity
Are you concerned about your safety on the web? Click here for some simple strategies for protecting your digital identity.
About Us & Contact
Learn how the The Center for Solutions to Online Violence (CSOV) functions as a virtual hub for a distributed community working to address the myriad forms of violence women and femmes experience in digital spaces. In addressing online harassment, our goal is to improve equity, access, and engagement with digital tools and culture.
The CSOV Community: Steering Collective, The Alchemists & Speaker’s Bureau
The Center for Solutions to Online Violence is a distributed network of activists, advocates, content creators, and educators who want to enable women and feminists to preemptively take steps to ensure control of their online identities and to educate everyone about the many forms of online violence.

OR YOU CAN BROWSE OUR RESOURCE PAGES

Key Terms and Definitions
A breakdown of terms, phrases and hashtags on topics related to online violence.
Organizations
Organizations working actively to end online violence and rights infringement.
Site-Specific Resources
Ever wonder how some of your favorite sites encourage safe interactions in an online sphere? Here, many popular social networking sites lay out their privacy policies, terms of agreement, and more.
The Mega-Spreadsheet of Resources
A collection of over 300 online resources.
The Law and History of Online Violence
How is the federal government handling online violence, and how far does the history of harassment in online spaces reach into the internet’s collective history?
Videos
Here you’ll find the CSOV Research Ethics, Social Media & Accountability video series as well as supplemental videos discussing the social implications of compromised safety in an online setting.

 


*Our logo is a modified version of the logo for the #tooFEW Wikipedia Edit-a-thon many of us were involved in 2013. When used for #TooFEW, it was part of making the argument that issues of race, gender, and sexuality weren’t adequately represented in Wikipedia. In suggesting it be modified for our purposes now we intend to keep that spirit, particularly seen in the work of the Digital Alchemy group which addresses the disproportionate online violence that women of color face, particularly Black cis and trans women. Read about FemTechNet and the contributors involved with CSOV. Contact us!

signal/noise: call 4 projects

sn-banner_1670x380

 

signal/noise call 4 projects

Deadline Extended till Monday, January 23, 2017!!! Early submissions welcome.

Are you a student who has made excellent work for a FemTechNet DOCC, or affiliated course? Would you like to have your game, essay, video, or other work featured in signal/noise: collected student works from a feminist docc? Do you want to engage in a peer review process with students from other DOCCs?

Click here to see signal/noise Vol. 1.

This is an opportunity to share your work with FemTechNet, and to circulate your work to an audience beyond your own class. It’s also a chance to be part of a collected edition of student work from FemTechNet DOCC-affiliated courses and to make public the work done by students across the network.

To send your work for consideration to signal/noise, please use this form.

Please check out the signal/noise peer review process to get a sense of how contributors will read and respond to each other’s work.

For more details contact your FemTechNet DOCC instructor or email the signal/noise editorial team at FTNPedProCom@gmail.com

If you would like to participate in the journal process by being a student or faculty member of our editorial collective, please let us know! Please email FTNPedProCom@gmail.com with your name, email/contact info, and interests/expertise. DOCC faculty lead editors: Prof. Cricket Keating,  Prof. Heide Solbrig & Prof. T.L. Cowan.

The Feminized Digital Body (On Consent and Gender Policing)

sn-banner_1670x380-issueno1

The Feminized Digital Body (On Consent and Gender Policing)

Ryan Khosravi

Abstract: This essay centers around the distinction of gender expression/gender policing within a digital space. Through an examination of the Vocaloid software and the avatars that accompany it, the essay takes a broader exploration about digital representation and the agency around that representation. The piece specifically looks at the ways in which the source and production of the software enforce the manipulation of the female Vocaloid, Hatsune Miku.

Furthermore, topics of agency and the production of gender are considered to help form the concept of the “Feminized Digital Body” – the cornerstone of the paper. As defined throughout the piece, this theory describes a form of gendering that occurs on a digital avatar. To contrast, the paper also looks at the “Digitized Feminine Body.” A concept that centers around consensual gender expression and the role of a female-bodied person and her strive towards being a digital avatar. The goal of the paper is to draw conclusions about digitality and how social structures, like gender, translate from physical realms to online spaces.

 “No hideous clowns or trickster spirits appear in the RL [Real Life] version of the incident, no voodoo dolls or wizard guns, indeed no rape at all as any RL court of law has yet defined it … Whatever physical interaction occurred consisted of a mingling of electronic signals sent from sites spread out between New York City and Melbourne, Australia.”

Julian Dibbell (A Rape in Cyberspace)

When the internet was first coming into existence, people expected a utopia. The rhetoric around digital space often frames it as a fresh start for social structures – a blank space for our culture to restart on all the wrongs it has written. It’s thought that because online spaces are accessible, the power relations that exist in real life don’t exist there. In reality, this is not the case. More so, we’re experiencing a translation of our existing social structures to an online setting. The real opportunity of digitality is not to exist outside our foundational power dynamics, but rather it is that we can witness how such a translation occurs and thus, make distinctions about both physical and digital cultures. As Lisa Nakamura puts it, “The Net is, like other media, a reflection of the cultural imagination. It is a hybrid medium that is collectively authored, synchronous, interactive, and subject to constant revision” (530). When Jonathan Sterne wrote about the history of the vocoder in MP3: The Meaning of a Format, he left out a contemporary cultural product in his analysis. Vocaloid software – a line of voice synthesizers, is a direct product of the history postvocoder that has impacted some ways that music is both created and listened to. As Sterne writes, “Vocoders reproduced speech by modeling the mechanism of speech” (106-107). The first Vocaloid project started in 2000 and in a similar history, it was created to reproduce a singer’s or voice actor’s real voice.

The individual will work in a studio to produce a range of different sounds, reading scripts in different tones and pitches. This software is then used to produce original songs by inputting the lyrics and melody into the program. Although the technology was originally not intended for commercial use, the interest from producers and musicians was enough to make Vocaloid into a commercial product. Now, the Vocaloids are sold individually by “singer” and used popularly in the music industry. Some musicians have used the software for features or back up vocals on songs, however, the most famous use of the Vocaloids are when they become their own icons, mostly in Japan.

Michel Chion writes about a figure in film – the acousmetre, which is represented through sound without any on-screen visual source. For Chion, this figure exists neither inside nor outside the film. In Chion’s words:

We may define it as neither inside nor outside the image. It is not inside, because the image of the voice’s source—the body, the mouth—is not included. Nor is it outside, since it is not clearly positioned offscreen in an imaginary “wing,” like a master of ceremonies or a witness, and it is implicated in the action, constantly about to be part of it. (Chion 129)

As a result of the invisible world in which it lives, the acousmetre has powers, granted by the context of film. The powers include being all-seeing, being omnipresent, and being omnipotent. In addition, the power of the Vocaloid’s invisibility, is the empty space left for creation. Rather than being defined in the limitations of an artist’s physical appearance or personality, the Vocaloid leaves a void to be filled – a fabricated clean slate. Now, the question becomes: who is given the power to fill the void? With a human artist, although agency and consent is always up for question, there are limitations to what can be altered in professional image. For example, although it is possible for a label to heavily pressure its artist to change his or her hairstyle, it wouldn’t exactly be possible for the record label to change the artist’s height or other genetic features. Even more so, record labels have never been in a position to just obtain a voice and completely form a physical manifestation of the voice.

Essentially, the power of the acousmetre is given to the production companies of Hatsune Miku and the other Vocaloid singers. With that power, Hatsune Miku will participate in any song, video, or performance that they wish her to. Now, the vocoder and Vocaloid shared trait of dehumanization needs to be reexamined through this context of power and its relationship to agency and consent. Let’s turn to Technology Transformation: The Anime Cyberbabe by Michelle Tung for a closer look at the significance of the feminized anime character, or what she calls The Anime Cyberbabe. As Tung puts it, “The Anime Cyberbabe… is an icon, an embodiment of an idea, and moreover, an ideal to both the creator and the viewer” (Tung 23). Hatsune Miku is an ideal, especially for the creators. A Choose Your Own Adventure. A BuildABear. A MMORPG character. Examples of this are in the carefully crafted appearance and list of qualities that are chosen for Miku. For example, the fact they made Miku a Virgo might speak to the place of purity and “the virgin” in pop culture. In addition, her age is extremely significant when thinking about the blank canvas that she serves. An intentional infantilization of a character that is to be presented to a realm that openly sexualizes animated female characters. For the viewer, they are given what they are always given, the unattainable, yet consumable, fantasy: “[w]hat happens is the reworking of mundane concerns into a perfect plastic world, a fabricated projection of true to life needs and desires onto an imaginary utopian canvas. The result: a fantasy that sells by adapting reality” (Tung 23). As an extension of the acousmetre, the viewer also attains more power than they usually would within their relationship to a human artist: the ability to create images, adventures, or origins for this character that has nothing set in stone. They fill in the blanks of this character and thus, create a richer experience for other fans. In an economic sense, they are participating in the production of capital by being active in the fan culture, creating a reciprocal between producer and viewer.

The idea of consent is a the key idea for analysis when considering the conception, production, and installation with the feminized digital body, which, for the purposes of this paper, will be defined as an animated character that is put into a specifically female gender context, typically to promote economic capital. The consent of a feminized digital body to be potentially manipulated or sexualized to the will of a creator is a consent that doesn’t exist. With Hatsune Miku, we can find some evidence of this in her lyrics. From a song titled, “Sweet Devil” Miku sings about her feminized presentation explicitly in some of the lines: “I’m showing too much of my chest? But you like it this way, don’t you?” “Comb your fingers through my hair and pat my head, calling me a good girl.” “You can be a bit more forceful I’m diving straight into your chest!” Through these lyrics we can see submission. We can see hesitant sexuality. We can see gender policing in the most archetypal form of Japanese femininity. Of course, this a problem with no direct solution. Unless we consider a future with a high level of artificial intelligence, consent will never exist for any Vocaloid. In fact, it should be argued that this type of power relationship is comparable to a type of cyber rape. In the article “A Rape in Cyberspace” by Julian Dibbell, we are introduced to a situation in which an assault and manipulation occurred on LambdaMOO, a text based roleplaying site from the 90s. Users would enter commands for their own characters in different settings, entirely in text. With something called a “voodoo doll” program, a user was able to manipulate the actions of another character’s words – basically controlling the actions of their avatar.

It’s essential that a critical lens is present when examining this case. Too easily could one analyze this with undermining the experiences of the victims, and swiftly attempt to distinguish a binary between reality and the digital. Dibbell interviewed one of the victims, “[she] would confide to me that…posttraumatic tears were streaming down her face — a reallife fact that should suffice to prove that the words’ emotional content was no mere fiction” (Dibbell.) The fact is that the binary between physical space and cyberspace is less concrete than is thought. It’s encouraged to think critically about any use of the word rape for academic gain. Although, I hope part of that critique can be used to consider the use of the word and its intention when discussing digital bodies as opposed to “real bodies.”

ryanhm

Rape confines bodies. In the case of the Vocaloid, it’s forcing matter into a feminized digital body – similar to the voodoll program of LambdaMOO. It’s the separation and manipulation of a voice, originally sourced from a human body, but completely reconstructed for the purposes of a producer. The result is the erasure of the human source – for Hatsune Miku, that would be Saki Fujita, the body that houses her voice. The type of objectification the feminized digital body goes through is surprisingly humanizing.The connotation of the word humanization is entirely inappropriate for the context, but with a rethinking of the word, it fits well. In fact, the relationship between objectification and humanization through the Vocaloid is rather unique and complex. It’s objectification is entirely related to the humanizing aspect of it’s performance.

To consider the feminized digital body fully, we must also consider a situation of potential consent regarding the feminine expression during performance, in addition to a more obvious relationship between voice and body– while still remaining digital. To put it in direct opposition, we’ll call this figure the digitized feminine body. As an example of this figure, let’s look more into other types of pop music. The musician QT, who is known for her song “Hey QT,” is the perfect example of the digitized feminine body. First, QT is the performance project of the artist Hayden Dunham, who approached the producers A.G. Cook and Sophie, with the idea of her song. She wanted a song that marketed an energy drink with the same name, which it would repeat consistently throughout the song. QT sings in her own edited vocals that have a synthetic higher pitch. It’s unlikely the voice of the song actually belongs to Dunham herself (the song is in a British accent while Dunham is American), but it’s clear that QT is actively performing as a passive body. During an interview, given in Fact Magazine, QT is asked about the relationship between her persona and the producers (A.G. Cook and Sophie): “As your producers, do they also sculpt you in some fashion?” To which QT responded: “No, I pretty much told them what I was after… heavy repetition of the word ‘QT’ for marketing purposes and an uplifting club sensation to back it up” (QT). In later interviews, QT answers questions with heavily embellished statements, but it seems here that she is being somewhat realistic in her answers. In fact, in another part of the interview, she brings attention to the semi-fictitious nature of the project and the reason why Cook was appealing to her, “I love how he creates these seemingly synthetic identities – working with his collaborators to distill them into concise pop products…” Obviously, we can never be certain as to the amount of agency an artist will have in their career, but QT vocalizes her ability as much as any other artist does. In terms of the song itself, during all of her performances, she doesn’t try to hide her lipsyncing, and in one particular performance, she plays the song behind a DJ set without even singing along.

ryanqt

Although we don’t get many clues behind the scenes, during the process of production for both the song and and identity, QT appears to be the lead creator. It seems that QT was the source for this project, and with her power, she chooses passivity. As her career progresses, there is a shift from a performer to a performance. Once again, we must look at the acousmetre for an analysis of QT. Similarly to Hatsune Miku, QT has somewhat of a separation between voice and body. Operating under the assumption that it is fact the voice of Hayden Dunham, the depth in which QT operates as a lip syncer creates a parallel to Vocaloid performances and thus, creates a further parallel to the acousmetre. In this case, however, QT could also fall under another film figure provided by Chion – an antithesis to the acousmetre. “The counterpart to the notyetseen voice is the body that has not yet spoken” (Chion 23). This character, although Chion doesn’t go into much detail, is similar to the acousmetre in terms of afforded power.

As a contrast to Hatsune Miku and the humanized objectification that takes place during her production and performance, we see a different type of objectification with QT. A self identified and self elicited objectification with QT, something that seems paradoxical. With Miku, the producers spent time forming a detailed description to make the avatar more appealing and human. With QT, she spends time trying to perfect her performance as a void of a performer.

If we think of feminization as a problem, it seems the power of the body is the answer, at least on the surface. Although, there seems to be another difference that separates the feminized digital and the digitized feminine in the examples of Miku and QT – that would be the activity of their machineness. While QT strives to demonstrate her machineness, Miku attempts to hide it. Although the production of the digital body is so connected to the rhetoric around the finished product, the digital body has a sense of virginity and permanence that the human body does not. We must be wary of presentations that embody Japanese archetypal femininity for they have a strong history of identity tourism. Within old chat rooms and text based forums, one could find performances of Asian female identities. According to Lisa Nakamura’s research, these accounts tended to be run by white American men. Nakamura writes that when “users extend their identity tourism across both race and gender, it is possible to observe a double appropriation… to exploit and reify the Asian woman as submissive, docile, and a sexual plaything” (527). It’s imperative to be critical when a feminized digital body such as Hatsune Miku doesn’t age or change in construction. Especially when the production and employment of a feminized digital body is entirely tied to capital gain. In addition, it’s worth having a further discussion about QT’s whiteness and the privilege to elect docility. From this research, we have a foundation to discuss the crumbling dichotomy of the natural and the synthetic. At what point will we understand digitality as a form of being? At what point will we see the significance of power dynamics online? At what point can we discuss the reality of digital bodies?

Works Cited

Chion, Michel, Claudia Gorbman, and Walter Murch. Audio vision: Sound on Screen . New York: Columbia UP, 1994. Print.

Dibbell, Julian. “A Rape in Cyberspace.” Http://www.juliandibbell.com/ Http://www.juliandibbell.com/, Dec. 1993. Web. Nov.Dec. 2015.

Lea, Tom. “Hey QT!” FACT Magazine Music News New Music . FACT Magazine, 9 Sept. 2014. Web. Nov.Dec. 2015.

Nakamura, Lisa. “HeadHunting on the Internet: Identity Tourism, Avatars, and Racial Passing in Textual and Graphic Chat Spaces.” Popular Culture: A Reader. Ed. Raiford Guins and Omayra Zaragoza. Cruz. London: SAGE Publications, 2005. N. pag. Print.

Sterne, Jonathan. MP3: The Meaning of a Format . Durham: Duke UP, 2012. Print.

Tung, Michelle. “Technology Transformation : The Anime Cyberbabe.” (Book, 2001) WorldCat.org . N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Jan. 2016.

 

Ryan Khosravi is a writer and podcast producer who lives in Queens, NY. His work ranges from topics of race and gender to video games and web culture, with a particular focus in how they all intersect. He has a B.A. in Culture and Media from Eugene Lang College.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

 

Protected: Inscrutable Bodies: Excerpts from a DOCC Blog

sn-banner_1920x250

signal/noise open peer review process

Our process is borrowed from our sibling organization, the FemBot Collective, who initiated an open peer review for their journal, Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media & Technology. Along with FemBot, we believe that scholarship is a collective effort, and we are “committed to a transparent, productive, and rigorous peer review process.”

signal/noise is a publication for excellent student work generated in the context of FemTechNet’s Distributed Open Collaborative Course (DOCC). We seek to publish a broad range of work across disciplines, genres and experience. Our hope is that signal/noise will be a destination for authors/makers and readers/players/audiences interested in feminist work—and by ‘feminist’ we mean intersectional and assemblaged analyses informed by critical race and ethnic studies, disability studies and crip theory, decolonizing, anti-colonial and post-colonial, transgender and women’s, gender and queer studies—in science, technology and media studies and related fields and praxes.

signal/noise is an extension of the distributed, open, collaborative pedagogies that energize and structure FemTechNet’s DOCC. We want to keep in mind that signal/noise is a publication for student work. By definition, student work is work that is created in the context of learning, and thus the review process is meant to be part of the learning experience, towards a goal of publication. For this reason we rely on peer editors (faculty, students and other FemTechNet members) to respond to the contributions we receive and to help the publication process by offering respectful, constructive feedback.

The signal/noise editorial collective is made up of FemTechNet participants including students, faculty and other members. Lead DOCC faculty editor: Prof. Cricket Keating.

Here is our process:

  1. signal/noise sends out a call for submissions with a clear deadline.
  2. The editorial collective considers all submissions, responds to the work, and gives authors/makers the option to submit the original or a revised version of the work to the open peer review site. The editorial collective can reject a contribution, if they deem it unsuitable for publication.
  3. Contributions are posted to the signal/noise password-protected open review site, where they are peer reviewed by other contributors and by invited members of FemTechNet. Reviewers’ comments are visible to the contributors and to other reviewers throughout the process.
  4. Each contributor is asked to respond to two other contributions by request from the editorial collective.
  5. Each contribution is also reviewed by two FemTechNet members, by request from the editorial collective.
  6. Once the review period is over (one month); the editorial board will compile the responses, send them to the contributors, and contributors will have at least two weeks to revise their contributions for final editorial collective review. After the review period, the peer review site will be cleared.
  7. The editorial collective will send publication decisions to the contributors.

The following notes for Authors & Reviewers are adapted from Ada.

Notes for Authors:

  • In the spirit of collaboration, the reviewer response is meant to facilitate a conversation between your work and the practices of FemTechNet. For more on the practices of FemTechNet, see our manifesto!
  • Spell and grammar check your piece before submitting it for peer review. signal/noise is mindful that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • signal/noise reviewers genuinely want to help you improve your work.
  • While you may not agree with everything a reviewer has to say, consider that the reviewer is going to be a member of the audience you’re eventually addressing. You should keep their comments and criticism in mind as you revise.
  • Share your reviews with colleagues and mentors – don’t stress about them in private. Other people can help give you perspective on reviewer comments.

Notes for Reviewers:

  • signal/noise seeks feedback that is generous and constructive: if someone does have systemic problems, recommend resources (a couple of key readings, videos, or other media; an editor; a proof-reader) that might help their work.
  • Don’t spend time correcting grammar and spelling. If these problems are systemic, do strongly suggest that the author use grammar and spell check in the future. Keep in mind that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • Do spend your time trying to make sense of the author’s argument: it often helps if you can summarize their argument or restate it.
  • Respect what the author is trying to do with their work without imposing your own idea of what they should be arguing. A common shortcoming in reviews is when the reviewer is really asking the author to create a totally different project.
  • You may personally disagree with the thesis of the argument. Say that, but also keep your own comments limited to how well the author supports the argument.
  • Always review the work at least twice. Don’t begin to write your comments until you’re on the second read-through.
  • Mind your tone. Remember this is student work; the editorial process is a learning process. Proofread your own written comments, paying attention to how you phrase things

Please contact FTNPedProCom@gmail.com if you would like to participate in the peer review process as a reviewer.

Protected: From Noise to Silence and Back Again

sn-banner_1920x250

signal/noise open peer review process

Our process is borrowed from our sibling organization, the FemBot Collective, who initiated an open peer review for their journal, Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media & Technology. Along with FemBot, we believe that scholarship is a collective effort, and we are “committed to a transparent, productive, and rigorous peer review process.”

signal/noise is a publication for excellent student work generated in the context of FemTechNet’s Distributed Open Collaborative Course (DOCC). We seek to publish a broad range of work across disciplines, genres and experience. Our hope is that signal/noise will be a destination for authors/makers and readers/players/audiences interested in feminist work—and by ‘feminist’ we mean intersectional and assemblaged analyses informed by critical race and ethnic studies, disability studies and crip theory, decolonizing, anti-colonial and post-colonial, transgender and women’s, gender and queer studies—in science, technology and media studies and related fields and praxes.

signal/noise is an extension of the distributed, open, collaborative pedagogies that energize and structure FemTechNet’s DOCC. We want to keep in mind that signal/noise is a publication for student work. By definition, student work is work that is created in the context of learning, and thus the review process is meant to be part of the learning experience, towards a goal of publication. For this reason we rely on peer editors (faculty, students and other FemTechNet members) to respond to the contributions we receive and to help the publication process by offering respectful, constructive feedback.

The signal/noise editorial collective is made up of FemTechNet participants including students, faculty and other members. Lead DOCC faculty editor: Prof. Cricket Keating.

Here is our process:

  1. signal/noise sends out a call for submissions with a clear deadline.
  2. The editorial collective considers all submissions, responds to the work, and gives authors/makers the option to submit the original or a revised version of the work to the open peer review site. The editorial collective can reject a contribution, if they deem it unsuitable for publication.
  3. Contributions are posted to the signal/noise password-protected open review site, where they are peer reviewed by other contributors and by invited members of FemTechNet. Reviewers’ comments are visible to the contributors and to other reviewers throughout the process.
  4. Each contributor is asked to respond to two other contributions by request from the editorial collective.
  5. Each contribution is also reviewed by two FemTechNet members, by request from the editorial collective.
  6. Once the review period is over (one month); the editorial board will compile the responses, send them to the contributors, and contributors will have at least two weeks to revise their contributions for final editorial collective review. After the review period, the peer review site will be cleared.
  7. The editorial collective will send publication decisions to the contributors.

The following notes for Authors & Reviewers are adapted from Ada.

Notes for Authors:

  • In the spirit of collaboration, the reviewer response is meant to facilitate a conversation between your work and the practices of FemTechNet. For more on the practices of FemTechNet, see our manifesto!
  • Spell and grammar check your piece before submitting it for peer review. signal/noise is mindful that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • signal/noise reviewers genuinely want to help you improve your work.
  • While you may not agree with everything a reviewer has to say, consider that the reviewer is going to be a member of the audience you’re eventually addressing. You should keep their comments and criticism in mind as you revise.
  • Share your reviews with colleagues and mentors – don’t stress about them in private. Other people can help give you perspective on reviewer comments.

Notes for Reviewers:

  • signal/noise seeks feedback that is generous and constructive: if someone does have systemic problems, recommend resources (a couple of key readings, videos, or other media; an editor; a proof-reader) that might help their work.
  • Don’t spend time correcting grammar and spelling. If these problems are systemic, do strongly suggest that the author use grammar and spell check in the future. Keep in mind that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • Do spend your time trying to make sense of the author’s argument: it often helps if you can summarize their argument or restate it.
  • Respect what the author is trying to do with their work without imposing your own idea of what they should be arguing. A common shortcoming in reviews is when the reviewer is really asking the author to create a totally different project.
  • You may personally disagree with the thesis of the argument. Say that, but also keep your own comments limited to how well the author supports the argument.
  • Always review the work at least twice. Don’t begin to write your comments until you’re on the second read-through.
  • Mind your tone. Remember this is student work; the editorial process is a learning process. Proofread your own written comments, paying attention to how you phrase things

Please contact FTNPedProCom@gmail.com if you would like to participate in the peer review process as a reviewer.

Protected: BrainGate2 as Cyborgian Technology

sn-banner_1920x250

signal/noise open peer review process

Our process is borrowed from our sibling organization, the FemBot Collective, who initiated an open peer review for their journal, Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media & Technology. Along with FemBot, we believe that scholarship is a collective effort, and we are “committed to a transparent, productive, and rigorous peer review process.”

signal/noise is a publication for excellent student work generated in the context of FemTechNet’s Distributed Open Collaborative Course (DOCC). We seek to publish a broad range of work across disciplines, genres and experience. Our hope is that signal/noise will be a destination for authors/makers and readers/players/audiences interested in feminist work—and by ‘feminist’ we mean intersectional and assemblaged analyses informed by critical race and ethnic studies, disability studies and crip theory, decolonizing, anti-colonial and post-colonial, transgender and women’s, gender and queer studies—in science, technology and media studies and related fields and praxes.

signal/noise is an extension of the distributed, open, collaborative pedagogies that energize and structure FemTechNet’s DOCC. We want to keep in mind that signal/noise is a publication for student work. By definition, student work is work that is created in the context of learning, and thus the review process is meant to be part of the learning experience, towards a goal of publication. For this reason we rely on peer editors (faculty, students and other FemTechNet members) to respond to the contributions we receive and to help the publication process by offering respectful, constructive feedback.

The signal/noise editorial collective is made up of FemTechNet participants including students, faculty and other members. Lead DOCC faculty editor: Prof. Cricket Keating.

Here is our process:

  1. signal/noise sends out a call for submissions with a clear deadline.
  2. The editorial collective considers all submissions, responds to the work, and gives authors/makers the option to submit the original or a revised version of the work to the open peer review site. The editorial collective can reject a contribution, if they deem it unsuitable for publication.
  3. Contributions are posted to the signal/noise password-protected open review site, where they are peer reviewed by other contributors and by invited members of FemTechNet. Reviewers’ comments are visible to the contributors and to other reviewers throughout the process.
  4. Each contributor is asked to respond to two other contributions by request from the editorial collective.
  5. Each contribution is also reviewed by two FemTechNet members, by request from the editorial collective.
  6. Once the review period is over (one month); the editorial board will compile the responses, send them to the contributors, and contributors will have at least two weeks to revise their contributions for final editorial collective review. After the review period, the peer review site will be cleared.
  7. The editorial collective will send publication decisions to the contributors.

The following notes for Authors & Reviewers are adapted from Ada.

Notes for Authors:

  • In the spirit of collaboration, the reviewer response is meant to facilitate a conversation between your work and the practices of FemTechNet. For more on the practices of FemTechNet, see our manifesto!
  • Spell and grammar check your piece before submitting it for peer review. signal/noise is mindful that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • signal/noise reviewers genuinely want to help you improve your work.
  • While you may not agree with everything a reviewer has to say, consider that the reviewer is going to be a member of the audience you’re eventually addressing. You should keep their comments and criticism in mind as you revise.
  • Share your reviews with colleagues and mentors – don’t stress about them in private. Other people can help give you perspective on reviewer comments.

Notes for Reviewers:

  • signal/noise seeks feedback that is generous and constructive: if someone does have systemic problems, recommend resources (a couple of key readings, videos, or other media; an editor; a proof-reader) that might help their work.
  • Don’t spend time correcting grammar and spelling. If these problems are systemic, do strongly suggest that the author use grammar and spell check in the future. Keep in mind that there are many ways of communicating and we seek to publish across language practices.
  • Do spend your time trying to make sense of the author’s argument: it often helps if you can summarize their argument or restate it.
  • Respect what the author is trying to do with their work without imposing your own idea of what they should be arguing. A common shortcoming in reviews is when the reviewer is really asking the author to create a totally different project.
  • You may personally disagree with the thesis of the argument. Say that, but also keep your own comments limited to how well the author supports the argument.
  • Always review the work at least twice. Don’t begin to write your comments until you’re on the second read-through.
  • Mind your tone. Remember this is student work; the editorial process is a learning process. Proofread your own written comments, paying attention to how you phrase things

Please contact FTNPedProCom@gmail.com if you would like to participate in the peer review process as a reviewer.

Baristi

sn-banner_1670x380-issueno1

Baristi

Skylar Maguire

 

BARISTI GAME PHOTO

Inspired by the work of trans game designers, and their games, like Anna Anthropy’s “Dys4ia”, I sought to create an autobiographical game that reflected my experiences as a non-binary trans barista affording top surgery. Since “barista” is a word of Italian origin, my title is a reference to the Italian plural, “baristi”, used to articulate masculine or mixed sex. Here, I claim baristi as singular while identifying with the mix of masculinity and femininity that the word implies. In terms of accessibility, Twine was the ideal platform. My objective was to centralize trans experiences as knowledge, destabilizing dominant cis knowledges. As players engage in Baristi’s interactive gameplay, they are unable to take control of the story, which remains my story throughout. My avatar likewise does the work of placing the narrative as mine rather than a universal trans experience. Finally, Baristi attempts to articulate gender within larger structures of power. Notably in Baristi, as a non-binary trans barista, labor and identity are always in tension, irreconcilably.

Download Baristi

Skylar Maguire is an organizer, filmmaker, drummer, and amateur game designer from Vermont. Currently living and going to school in New York City, they study Media and Culture with double minors in Gender Studies and Global Studies. Now a retired barista, they enjoy life as dog walker, doggie day care attendant, and volunteer cat caretaker – an unpaid position where they attempt to feed and/or befriend the neighborhood strays.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Domestic Violence 101

sn-banner_1670x380-issueno1

Domestic Violence 101

Katie McLennan

My goal with this project was to make a short and accessible video to educate the general public or new social services volunteers about some Domestic Violence basics (what it is, what it looks like, what not to say, how to help.) By creating a 7-minute video, I believe I’ve made an accessible piece of technology because people can easily watch the whole thing in a short period of time. I’ve uploaded it to YouTube, making it accessible to millions of people. I hardly use my YouTube channel, but I understand that by putting it out to the world wide web I am opening it up to be used and shared by anyone for any purpose.

As an identified social justice activist, I’m proud to have been able to make this video even if the film quality isn’t up to my perfectionist standards. I’m proud to have a tool at my disposal that I can share, and that is concise, accurate, simple and accessible. This class has helped me to be more open to working with technologies I’m unfamiliar with. It has helped me to be aware of the ways I need to monitor my own privacy, security and self-representation through technology and it has given me a way to further my social justice agenda through the use of multiple technologies.

Katie McLennan is graduating from the University of Washington in Seattle with a double major in Anthropology and Gender, Women’s and Sexuality Studies. She enjoys playing guitar and gardening, and spends an inordinate amount of time caring for and rescuing animals. Her ambition is to be a force in creating a more compassionate and equitable world.

Expanding A Network of Accessible Feminist Technology Information

sn-banner_1670x380-issueno1

Expanding A Network of Accessible Feminist Technology Information

Verónica Pelayo and Mina Tari

Our project is three short podcasts introducing different security measures for users to increase personal security when browsing the net. The three technologies are Safe Shepherd, Trace My Shadow, and Account Killer. We discussed the benefits of using these technologies, as well as easy to understand definitions of how they work. As two very enthusiastic activists, we felt that we had created something that was going to be helpful to a population that may be in more need of privacy and security education and protection. Having been learning about the excessive data mining and security violations throughout the quarter, we were feeling the wariness in relying on our technology. Being able to take back some of that control through the technology we covered allowed us to feel a bit safer and less at the mercy of the institution. We only hope that others, possibly using our project results, would be able to feel the same way in the future!

Safe Shepard

 

Trace My Shadow

 

Account Killer

 

Mina Tari is an Informatics and Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies student at the University of Washington. Her academic endeavors focus on increasing accessibility of technological education for intersectional identities. She often applies gender theory to Informatics research, critically analyzing practices and suggesting more inclusive techniques.

Verónica Pelayo is an intersectional feminist, activist, and artist. She has a B.A. in Drama and Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies from the University of Washington.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.