This article draws on anthropological work among two groups of technical specialists, mechanics in Malaysia and engineers in Sweden. From a cross-cultural perspective, it focuses on and critically examines ways in which masculine bonds are mediated and communicated through interactions with machines, in particular, motorbikes and cars. In these different social settings, technologies can be understood as means of an embodied communication for forming homosocial bonds. These masculine practices continuously exclude women and perpetuate highly genderized societal spheres where men form communities based on passion for machines. Such passion involves an anthropomorphization of the man-machine relationship in which the machines are transformed into subjects in what might be termed a heterosexual, masculine, technical sociability and subjectivity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Archetti, E. P. 1999. Masculinities. Football, polo and the tango in Argentina. London: Berg.
2.
Berg, A.-J. 1996. Digital feminism. Report n. 28. Dragvoll, Norway: Centre for Technology and Society, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
3.
Bourdieu, P. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
4.
Braidotti. R. 1994. Nomadic Subjects. Embodiment and sexual difference in contemporary feminist theory. New York: Columbia University Press.
5.
Butler, J. 1993. Bodies that matter. New York: Routledge.
6.
Carlson. M. 1996. Performance. London: Routledge.
7.
Cockburn, C. 1983. Male dominance and technological change. London: Pluto.
8.
Cockburn, C. 1985. Machinery of dominance: Women, men and technical know-how.London: Pluto.
9.
Connell, R. W. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10.
Cornwall, A., and N. Lindisfarne, eds. 1994. Dislocating masculinity. Comparative ethnographies. London: Routledge.
11.
de Almeida, M. V. 1996. The hegemonic male: Masculinity in a Portuguese town. London: Berghahn.
12.
Duke, N. 1958. Book of flight. London: Longman.
13.
Farnell, B. 1999. Moving bodies, acting selves. Annual Review of Anthropology28:341-373.
14.
Faulkner, W. 2000a. Dualisms, hierarchies and gender in engineering. Social Studies of Science30 (5): 759-792.
15.
Faulkner, W. 2000b. The power and the pleasure? Aresearch agenda for “making gender stick” to engineers. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 25 (1): 87-119.
16.
Faulkner, W. 2001. The technology question in feminism: A view from feminist technology studies. Women’s Studies International Forum24 (1): 79-95.
17.
Foucault, M. 1978. The history of sexuality: An introduction. Vol. 1. London: Penguin.
18.
Freedman, M. 1966. Chinese lineage and society: Fukien and Kwangtung. London: Athlone.
19.
George, D. E. R. 1996. Performance epistemology. Journal ofPerformance Studies1 (1): 16-25.
20.
Gutmann, M. 1997. Trafficking in men: The anthropology of masculinity. Annual Review of Anthropology26:385-409.
21.
Hacker, S. 1989. Pleasure, power and technology: Some tales of gender, engineering, and the cooperative workplace. Boston: Unwin Hyman.
22.
Hacker, S. 1990. Doing it the hard way: Investigations of gender and technology.Boston: Unwin Hyman.
23.
Hallgren, C. 1986. Morally united and politically divided. The Chinese community of Penang. Department of Social Anthropology, Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm University.
24.
Håpnes, T., and B. Rasmussen. 1991. Excludingwomen from the technologies of the future? Futures23 (10): 1107-1119.
25.
Harper, D. 1987. Working knowledge: Skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
26.
Hastrup, K. 1995. Incorporated knowledge. Mime Journal, 2-10, Claremont, CA: Pomona College Theatre Department.
27.
Humphrey, R. 1993. Life stories and social careers: Ageing and social life in an ex-mining town. Sociology27 (1): 166-179.
28.
Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29.
Huxley, M., and N. Witts. 1996. The twentieth-century performance reader. NewYork: Routledge.
30.
Kimmel, M., and M. Messner. 1997. Men’s lives. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
31.
Lagergren, L. 1999. Svensk motorcykelkultur[Swedish motorcycle culture]. Stockholm, Sweden: Brutus Östlings bokförlag, Symposion.
32.
Law, J. 1998. Machinic pleasures and interpellations. In Machines, agency and desire, edited by B. Brenna, J. Law, and I. Moser, 23-49. Oslo, Norway: University of Oslo, Center for Teknologi og mennesklige verdier
33.
Lie, M. 1996. “Excavating” the present: The computer as gendered material culture. Knowledge and Society10:51-68.
34.
McIlwee J. S., and G. J. Robinson. 1992. Women in engineering: Gender, power, and workplace culture. New York: New York University Press.
35.
Mellström, U. 1995. Engineering lives: Technology, time and space in a male-centred world. No. 128. Linköping, Sweden: Linköping Studies in Art and Science.
36.
Mellström, U. 1999. Män och deras maskiner[Men and their machines]. Nora, Sweden: Nya Doxa.
37.
Mellström, U. 2003a. Masculinity, power and technology: A Malaysian ethnography. Oxon, UK: Ashgate.
38.
Mellström, U. 2003b. Technology and masculinity: Men and their machines. In Moulding masculinities, edited by S. Ervø and T. Johansson, 118-135. Oxon, UK: Ashgate.
39.
Oldenziel, R. 1999. Making technology masculine: Men, women, and modern machines in America, 1870-1945.Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
40.
Paulsen, G. 1997. Pilgrimage on a steel ride: A memoir about men and motorcycles. New York: Harcourt Brace.
41.
Pirsig, R. M. 1974. Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance: An inquiry into values. New York: William Morrow.
42.
Strathern, M. 1988. The gender of the gift. Berkeley: University of California Press.
43.
Wajcman, J. 1991. Feminism confronts technology. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
44.
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Willis, P. 1978. Profane culture. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
