This article provides a snapshot of the relationship between the internet and gender in the early days of home internet connections in Australia. Based as it is on one of the first qualitative studies of home use of the internet and what appears to be the earliest Australian study of home use of the internet, it helps to fill a gap in the history of the internet in Australia. It draws from 76 in-depth interviews conducted in 1998 with members of nineteen household families who had a home internet connection. At the time of the research, there were a variety of stories in circulation regarding the relationship between the internet and gender. The analysis presented in this article presents a more nuanced picture of this relationship in the early days of domestic internet connections. Rather than just comparing the different experiences of males and females, it looks at how gender was constituted in the meanings users invested in particular uses or non-uses of the internet at home, and in particular in the idea of technical mastery.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltmanK.E.1990, ‘Modern Discourse on American Home Technologies’, in MedhurstM.GonzalezA.PetersonT.R. (eds), Communication and the Culture of Technology, Washington State University Press, Pullman, WA.
2.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)1996, Household Use of Information Technology, ABS, Canberra.
3.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)1997, Australian Women's Year Book, ABS, Canberra.
4.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)1998, Use of the Internet by Householders, ABS, Canberra.
5.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)2011, Internet Activity, Australia, ABS, Canberra.
6.
BakardjievaM.2005, Internet Society: The Internet in Everyday Life, Sage, London.
7.
BakardjievaM.2011, ‘The Internet in Everyday Life: Exploring the Tenets and Contributions of Diverse Approaches’, in ConsalvoM.EssC. (eds), The Handbook of Internet Studies, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
8.
BaxterJ.1993, Work at Home: The Domestic Division of Labour, University of Queensland Press, Brisbane.
9.
BaxterJ.BittmanM.1995, ‘Measuring Time Spent on Housework: A Comparison of Two Approaches’, The Australian Journal of Social Research, vol. 11, pp. 21–46.
10.
BergA.-J.1996, Digital Feminism, University of Trondheim, Oslo.
11.
BlumerH.1969, Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
12.
BourdieuP.1977, Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
13.
BourdieuP.1984, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Routledge, London.
14.
BromsethJ.SundenJ.2011, ‘Queering Internet Studies: Intersections of Gender and Sexuality’, in ConsalvoM.EssC. (eds), The Handbook of Internet Studies, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
15.
ButlerJ.1990, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, New York.
16.
ClarkeR.2004, ‘An Internet Primer’, in GogginG. (ed.), Virtual Nation, UNSW Press, Sydney.
17.
CockburnC.1994, ‘The Circuit of Technology: Gender, Identity and Power’, in SilverstoneR.HirschE. (eds), Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, Routledge, London.
18.
CockburnC.OrmrodS.1993, Gender and Technology in the Making, Sage, London.
19.
DenzinN.2001, ‘Symbolic Interactionism, Poststructuralism and the Racial Subject’, Symbolic Interaction, vol. 242, pp. 243–49.
20.
EwingS.ThomasJ.2010, CCi Digital Futures 2010: The Internet in Australia, ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation, Institute for Social Research, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne.
21.
FrowJ.1995, Cultural Studies and Cultural Value, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
22.
GlaserB.StraussA.1967, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine, San Francisco.
GreggM.2006, ‘Posting With Passion: Blogs and the Politics of Gender’, in BrunsA.JacobsJ. (eds), Uses of Blogs, Peter Lang, New York.
25.
GreenL.2010, The Internet: An Introduction to New Media, Berg, Oxford.
26.
GrayA.1995, ‘I Want to Tell You a Story: The Narratives of Video Playtime’, in SkeggsB. (ed.), Feminist Cultural Theory: Process and Production, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
27.
HarawayD.J.1991, Simians, Cyborgs and Women, Routledge, New York.
28.
HelsperE.WhittyM.2010, ‘Gendered Internet Use Across Generations and Life Stages’, Communication Research, vol. 37, pp. 352–74.
29.
HerringS.JohnsonD.DiBenedettoT.1995, ‘“This Discussion is Going Too Far”: Male Resistance to Female Participation on the Internet’, in HallK.BucholtzM. (eds), Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, Routledge, New York.
30.
KendallL.2000, ‘“OH NO! I'M A NERD!”: Hegemonic Masculinity on an Online Forum’, Gender & Society, vol. 14, pp. 256–74.
31.
KendallL.2011, ‘Community and the Internet’, in ConsalvoM.EssC. (eds), The Handbook of Internet Studies, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford.
32.
KimH.2009, ‘Women's Games in Japan: Gendered Identity and Narrative Construction’, Theory, Culture & Society, vol. 262, no. 3, pp. 165–88.
33.
KramaraeC. (ed.) 1988, Technology and Women's Voices: Keeping in Touch, Routledge & Kegan Paul, New York.
34.
LallyE.2002, At Home with Computers, Berg, Oxford.
35.
LivingstoneS.1994, ‘The Meaning of Domestic Technologies: A Personal Construct Analysis of Familial Gender Relations’, in SilverstoneR.HirschE. (eds), Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, Routledge, London.
36.
MoyalA.1992, ‘The Gendered Use of the Telephone: An Australian Case Study’, Media, Culture and Society, vol. 14, pp. 51–72.
37.
OudshoornN.PinchT.2003, How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technologies, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
38.
OudshoornN.PinchT.2008, ‘User–Technology Relationships: Some Recent Developments’, in HackettE.J.AmsterdamskaO.LynchM.WajcmanJ. (eds), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed., MIT Press, London.
39.
PlantS.1996, ‘The Future Looms: Weaving Women and Cybernetics’, in LeesonL. Hershman (ed.), Clicking In: Hot Links to a Digital Culture, Bay Press, Seattle.
RakowL.1988, ‘Gendered Technology, Gendered Practice’, Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol. 5, pp. 57–70.
42.
RheingoldH.1994, The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier, HarperPerennial, New York.
43.
RoyseP.LeeJ.UndrahbuyanB.HopsonM.ConsalvoM.2007, ‘Women and Games: Technologies of the Gendered Self’, New Media & Society, vol. 94, pp. 555–76.
44.
ShieldsR. (ed.) 1996, Cultures of Internet: Virtual Spaces, Real Histories, Living Bodies, Sage, London.
45.
SilverstoneR.1991, Beneath the Bottom Line: Households and Information and Communication Technologies in an Age of the Consumer, ESRC Economic and Social Research Council, Oxford.
46.
SinghS.2001, ‘Gender and the Use of the Internet at Home’, New Media & Society, vol. 34, pp. 395–415.
47.
SkeggsB.1997, Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable, Sage, London.
48.
SpenderD.1995, Nattering on the Net: Women, Power and Cyberspace, Spinifex Press, Melbourne.
49.
StoneA.R.1997, ‘In the Language of Vampire Speak: Overhearing Our Own Voices’, in GoldingS. (ed.), The Eight Technologies of Otherness, Routledge, London.
50.
TurkleS.1995, Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, Simon and Schuster, New York.
WallerV.2001, ‘The Consumption of the Internet in Household Families’, unpublished PhD thesis, Sociology Program, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra.
53.
WeberR.1999, ‘Manufacturing Gender in Military Cockpit Design’, in MacKenzieD.WajcmanJ. (eds), The Social Shaping of Technology, Open University Press, Buckingham.
54.
WheelockJ.1994, ‘Personal Computers, Gender and an Institutional Model of the Household’, in SilverstoneR.HirschE. (eds), Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, London, Routledge.
55.
WhiteM.2011, ‘Engaged with eBay: How Heterosexual Unions and Traditional Gender Roles are Rendered by the Site and Members’, Feminist Media Studies, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 303–19.
