This paper addresses ways in which theorizing gender may be important in forming an understanding of the topic of emancipation, which is central to the new critical information systems (IS) based on the thinking of Habermas. After briefly discussing some problems with current research on gender and IS the paper argues that appropriate feminist theory may be useful in augmenting our understanding of foundational issues such as emancipation. The development of feminist philosophy and epistemology is briefly introduced. Habermas’ ‘ideal speech situation’ is problematized in relation to feminist writing on male and female communication juxtaposed with recent research in computer-mediated communications. The paper continues by exploring the concept of emancipation through feminist epistemology and it closes with a preliminary consideration of how these concerns may be applied to critical IS.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamA. (1998). Artificial Knowing: Gender and the Thinking Machine (Routledge, London and New York).
2.
AdamA. (2000). Information systems: we still need a feminist approach. In Women, Work and Computerization: Charting a Course to the Future, BalkaE., and SmithR. (eds) (Kluwer, Norwell, MA and Dordrecht), pp. 102–10.
3.
AdamA. (2001). Computer ethics in a different voice. Information and Organization, 11(4), 235–61.
4.
AdamA., and RichardsonH. (2001). Feminist philosophy and information systems. Information Systems Frontiers, 3(2), 143–54.
5.
AdamA., HowcroftD., and RichardsonH. (2001). Absent friends? The gender dimension in IS research. In Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development: The Social and Organizational Perspective, RussoN.L., FitzgeraldB., and DeGrossJ.I. (eds) (Kluwer, Boston, MA, London and Dordrecht), pp. 333–52.
6.
AlvessonM., and WillmottH. (eds) (1992). Critical Management Studies (Sage, London, Newbury Park, CA and New Delhi).
7.
AlvessonM., and WillmottH. (eds) (1996). Making Sense of Management: A Critical Introduction (Sage, London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi).
8.
AssiterA. (1996). Enlightened Women: Modernist Feminism in a Postmodern Age (Routledge, London and New York).
9.
BenhabibS. (1986). Critique, Norm and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory (Columbia University Press, New York).
10.
BenhabibS. (1992). Situating the Self: Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics (Polity, Cambridge, UK).
11.
BjerknesG., and BratteteigT. (1987). FLORENCE in Wonderland: system development with nurses. In Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge, BjerknesG., EhnP., and KyngM. (eds) (Avebury, Aldershot, UK), pp. 279–95.
12.
BjerknesG., EhnP., and KyngM. (eds) (1987). Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge (Avebury, Aldershot, UK).
13.
BurtT. (1997). Stalking and voyeurism over the Internet: psychiatric and forensic issues. Proceedings of the Academy of Forensic Science, 3, 172.
14.
CampT. (1997). The incredible shrinking pipeline. Communications of the ACM, 40(10), 103–10.
ChecklandP., and HolwellS. (1998). Information, Systems and Information Systems (Wiley, Chichester, UK).
17.
CodeL. (ed.) (2000). Encyclopaedia of Feminist Theories (Routledge, New York and London).
18.
EssC. (1996). The political computer: democracy, CMC, and Habermas. In Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-mediated Communication, EssC. (ed.) (SUNY Press, Albany, NY), pp. 197–230.
19.
EvansM. (ed.) (1994). The Woman Question (Sage, London).
20.
FitzgeraldB., and HowcroftD. (1998). Towards dissolution of the IS research debate: from polarization to polarityJournal of Information Technology, 13, 313–26.
21.
FloodR.L., and JacksonM.C. (1991a). Critical Systems Thinking: Directed Readings (Wiley, New York).
22.
FloodR.L., and JacksonM.C. (1991b). Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention (Wiley, New York).
23.
FloodR.L., and RommN.R. (1996). Critical Systems Thinking: Current Research and Practice (Plenum, New York and London).
24.
FraserN. (1995). What's critical about critical theory? In Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse, MeehanJ. (ed.) (Routledge, New York and London), pp. 21–55.
25.
GefenD., and StraubD. (1997). Gender differences in the perception and use of e-mail: an extension to the technology acceptance model. MIS Quarterly, 21(4), 389–400.
26.
GilliganC. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
27.
GreenE. (1994). Gender perspectives, office systems and organizational change. In Women, Work and Computerization: Breaking Old Boundaries: Building New Forms. IFIP Transactions A-57, AdamA., EmmsJ., GreenE., and OwenJ. (eds) (Elsevier-North Holland, Amsterdam), pp. 365–77.
28.
GreenE., OwenJ., and PainD. (1993). ‘City libraries’: human-centred opportunities for women? In Gendered by Design? Information Technology and Office Systems, GreenE., OwenJ., and PainD. (eds) (Taylor & Francis, London), pp. 127–52.
29.
HabermasJ. (1972). Knowledge and Human Interests (Heinemann, London).
30.
HabermasJ. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume One: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (Heinemann, London).
31.
HarawayD. (1989). Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science (Routledge, New York and London).
32.
HarawayD. (1991). Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature, HarawayD. (ed.) (Free Association Books, London), pp. 183–201.
33.
HardingS. (1991). Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women's Lives (Open University Press, Milton Keynes).
34.
HekmanS. (1990). Gender and Knowledge: Elements of a Postmodern Feminism (Polity Press, Cambridge, UK).
35.
HerringS. (1996). Posting in a different voice: gender and ethics in computer-mediated communication. In Philosophical Perspectives on Computer-mediated Communication, EssC. (ed.) (SUNY Press, Albany, NY), pp. 115–45.
36.
HirschheimR. (1985). Information systems epistemology: an historical perspective. In Research Methods in Information Systems: Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.2 Colloquium, MumfordE., HirschheimR., FitzgeraldG., and Wood-HarperT. (eds) (North-Holland, Amsterdam), pp. 13–36.
37.
HirschheimR., KleinH., and LyytinenK. (1995). Information Systems Development and Data Modeling: Conceptual and Philosophical Foundations (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, New York and Melbourne).
38.
HirschheimR., KleinH., and LyytinenK. (1996). Exploring the intellectual structures of information systems development: a social action theoretic analysis. Accounting, Management and Information Technology, 6(1/2), 1–64.
39.
HrdyS.B. (1999). Mother Nature: Natural Selection and the Female of the Species (Chatto & Windus, London).
40.
IgbariaM., and ChidambaramM. (1997). The impact of gender on career success of information systems professionals. Information Technology & People, 10(1), 63–86.
41.
IrigarayL. (1985). This Sex Which is Not One, Porter, C. (trans.) (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY).
42.
JacksonM.C. (1997). Critical systems thinking and information systems research. In Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline?, MingersJ., and StowellF. (eds) (McGraw-Hill, London), pp. 201–38.
43.
LandowG.P. (1992). Hypertext: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore).
44.
LaurelB. (1994). Computers as Theatre (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).
45.
MarxK. (1975). Letter to A. Ruge, September 1843, In Karl Marx: Early Writings, Livingstone, R. and Benton, G. (trans.), Vintage Books, New York, p. 209.
46.
MeehanJ. (1995). Introduction. In Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse, MeehanJ. (ed.) (Routledge, New York and London), pp. 1–20.
47.
MidgleyG. (1992). The sacred and profane in systems thinking. Systems Practice, 5, 5–16.
48.
MingersJ., and StowellF. (eds) (1997). Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline? (McGraw-Hill, London).
49.
NagelT. (1986). A View From Nowhere (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
50.
PackardA. (2000). Does proposed federal cyberstalking legislation meet constitutional requirements?Communication Law and Policy, 5, 505–38.
51.
PanteliA., StackJ., AtkinsonM., and RamsayH. (1999). The status of women in the UK IT industry: an empirical study. European Journal of Information Systems, 8, 170–82.
52.
RheingoldH. (1993). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Virtual Frontier (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).
53.
RichardsonH., and RichardsonK. (2001). Customer relationship management (CRM) systems and information ethics in call centres – ‘You are the weakest link. Goodbye!’. In Proceedings of ETHICOMP 2001, BynumT.W., KrawczykH., RogersonS., SzejkoS., WiszniewskiB. (eds), Vol. 2, University of Gdansk, Gdansk, pp. 121–130.
54.
RobertsonM., BjerknesG., MatthiessenL., NewellS., and SwanJ. (1999). Is gender an issue in information systems? A comparative analysis of UK and Scandinavian data and experience. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Information Systems, Pries-HejeJ., CiborraC., KautzK., ValorJ., ChristiannseE., AvisonD., and HejeC. (eds) (University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen), pp. 1032–7.
55.
SpaulM. (1997). Discipline and critique: the case of information systems? In Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline?, MingersJ., and StowellF. (eds) (McGraw-Hill, London), pp. 63–95.
56.
SpenderD. (1980). Man Made Language (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London).
57.
SproullL., and KesslerS. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
58.
TannenD. (1992). You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation (Virago, London).
59.
TongR. (1993). Feminine and Feminist Ethics (Wadsworth, Belmont, CA).
60.
TongR. (1994). Feminist Thought: A Comprehensive Introduction (Routledge, London).
61.
TrumanG., and BaroudiJ. (1994). Gender differences in the information systems managerial ranks: an assessment of potential discriminatory practices. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 129–41.
62.
VehviläinenM. (1997). Gender, expertise and information technology. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
63.
VenkateshV., and MorrisM. (2000). Why don't men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115–39.
64.
WebsterJ. (1990). Office Automation: The Labour Process and Women's Work in Britain (Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York and London).
65.
WilsonM., and HowcroftD. (2000). The role of gender in user resistance and IS failure. In Organizational and Social Perspectives on Information Technology, BaskervilleR., StageJ., and DeGrossJ. (eds) (Kluwer, Boston, MA), pp. 453–72.
66.
WinnerL. (1997). Cyberlibertarian myths and the prospect for community. ACM Computers and Society, 27(3), 14–19.
