The Internet is now a site where women with breast cancer both read and write about the illness, and in doing so negotiate identity and definitions of situation in disembodied space. Cyberspace has been imagined as a liberatory realm where women can transgress gender roles, invent selves and create new forms of knowledge. This study explores the personal web pages of women with breast cancer with an interest in exploring the issue of ‘cyber-agency’ or empowerment in cyberspace. I suggest here that women’s web pages might offer potentially critical opportunities for women’s knowledge-making in relation to what are often highly political aspects of the body, gender and illness. However, the Internet is not an inherently empowering technology, and it can be a medium for affirming norms of femininity, consumerism, individualism and other powerful social messages.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Altheide, D. (2000). Identity and the definition of the situation in a mass-mediated context . Symbolic Interaction, 23(1), 1-27 .
2.
Altman, R. (1996). Waking up/fighting back: The politics of breast cancer. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co .
3.
Balsamo, A. (1995). Forms of technological embodiment: Reading the body in contemporary culture. In J. Price and M. Shildrick (Eds.), Feminist theory and the body: A reader, pp. 278-289. London: Sage Publications .
4.
Bassett, C. (1997). Virtually gendered: Life in an on-line world. In K. Gelder and S. Thorton (Eds.), The subcultures reader, pp. 537-550. London: Routledge .
5.
Batt, S. (1994). Patient no more: The politics of breast cancer. New York: Gynergy Books .
6.
Bell, D. and Kennedy, B., Eds. (2000). The cybercultures reader. London: Routledge .
7.
Broom, D. (2001). Reading breast cancer: Reflections on a dangerous intersection . health:, 5(2), 249-268 .
Cartwright, L. (2000). Reach out and heal someone: Telemedicine and the globalization of health care . health:, 4(3), 347-377 .
10.
Clarke, A. and Olesen, V., Eds. (1999). Revisioning women, health and healing: Feminist, cultural and technoscience perspectives. New York: Routledge .
11.
Collins, P. Hill. (1991). Black feminist thought: Knowledges, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge .
12.
Croteau, D. and Hoynes, W. (2000). Media society: Industries, images, and audiences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press .
13.
Featherstone, M. (2000). Post-bodies, aging, and virtual reality. In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 609-618. London: Routledge .
14.
Fosket, J. (2000). Problematizing biomedicine: Women’s constructions of breast cancer knowledge. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 15-36. New York: St Martin’s Press .
15.
Fosket, J., Karran, A. and LaFia, C. (2000). Breast cancer in popular women’s magazines from 1913 to 1996. In A. Kasper and S. Ferguson (Eds.), Breast cancer: Society shapes an epidemic, pp. 303-323. New York: St Martin’s Press .
16.
Frank, A. (1995). The wounded storyteller: Body, illness and ethics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .
17.
Frank, A. (2000). Illness and the interactionist vocation . Symbolic Interaction, 23(4), 321-333 .
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Cambridge: Polity Press .
20.
Hall, S. (1996). Representation: Cultural representation and signifying practices. London: Open University Press .
21.
Hallowell, N. (2000). Reconstructing the body or reconstructing the woman? Problems of prophylactic mastectomy for hereditary breast cancer risk. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 153-180. New York: St Martin’s Press .
22.
Hardey, M. (1999). Doctor in the house: The Internet as a source of lay health knowledge and the challenge to expertise . Sociology of Health and Illness, 21(6), 820-836 .
23.
Haug, M. and Lavin, B. (1983). Consumerisim in medicine: Challenging physician authority. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications .
24.
Higgins, R., Rushaija, E. and Medhurst, A. (1999). Technowhores. In Cutting Edge: The Women’s Research Group (Eds.), Desire by design: Body, territories and the new technologies, pp. 111-122. London: I.B. Tauris .
25.
Kendall, Lori. (1998). Meaning and identity in ‘cyberspace’: The performance of gender, class, and race online . Symbolic Interaction, 21(2), 129-154 .
26.
Klawiter, M. (2000). Racing for the cure, walking women and toxic touring: Mapping cultures of action within the bay area terrain of breast cancer. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 63-97. New York: St Martin’s Press .
27.
Leary, T. (2000). The cyberpunk: The individual as reality pilot. In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 529-539. London: Routledge .
28.
Link, B. and Phelan, J. (1995). Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease . Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 35(Special Issue), 80-94 .
29.
Lorde, A. (1980). The Audre Lorde compendium: Essays, speeches and journals. London: HarperCollins .
30.
Martin, E. (1987). The woman in the body: A cultural analysis of reproduction. Boston, MA: Beacon Press .
31.
Martin, E. (1994). Flexible bodies: Tracking immunity in American culture from the days of polio to the age of AIDS. Boston, MA: Beacon Press .
32.
Pitts, V. (2001). Popular pedagogies, illness and the gendered body: Reading breast cancer discourse in cyberspace . Popular Culture Review, 12(2), 21-36 .
33.
Plant, S. (2000). On the matrix: Cyberfeminist simulations. In D. Bell and M. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 325-436. London: Routledge .
34.
Poster, M. (1995). The second media age. Cambridge: Polity .
35.
Potts, L. (2000). Publishing the personal: Autobiographical narratives of breast cancer and the self. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 98-127. New York: St Martin’s Press .
36.
Sardar, Z. (2000). Alt.civilizations.FAQ: Cyberspace as the darker side of the West. In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 732-752. London: Routledge .
37.
Saywell, C. with Henderson, L. and Beattie, L. (2000). Sexualized illness: The newsworthy body in media representations of breast cancer. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 37-62. New York: St Martin’s Press .
38.
Science Panel on Interactive Communication and Health. (1999). Wired for health and well-being: The emergence of interactive health communication. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, US Government Printing Office .
39.
Sedgwick, E. Kofosky. (1999). Breast cancer: An adventure in applied deconstruction. In J. Price and M. Shildrick (Eds.), Feminist theory and the body: A reader. New York: Routledge .
40.
Shilling, C. (1993). The body and social theory. London: Sage Publications .
41.
Simpson, C. (2000). Controversies in breast cancer prevention: The discourse of risk. In L. Potts (Ed.), Ideologies of breast cancer, pp. 131-152. New York: St Martin’s Press .
42.
Stacey, J. (1992). Teratologies: A cultural study of cancer. London: Routledge .
43.
Stratton, J. (2000). Cyberspace and the globalization of culture. In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 721-731. London: Routledge .
44.
Thornham, S. (2000). Feminist theory and cultural studies: Stories of unsettled relations. London: Arnold .
45.
Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster .
46.
Turner, B.S. (1991). Recent developments in the theory of the body. In M. Featherstone, M. Hepworth and B.S. Turner (Eds.), The body: Social process and cultural theory, pp. 1-35. London: Sage Publications .
47.
Wakeford, N. (1997). Cyberqueer. In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 403-415. London: Routledge .
Wilding, Faith. (1998). Where is the feminism in cyberfeminism? n.paradoxa, 2, 6-13 .
52.
Wilkerson, A.L. (1998). Diagnosis: Difference: The moral authority of medicine. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press .
53.
Wilkinson, S. (2001). Breast cancer: Feminism, representations and resistance - a commentary on Dorothy Broom’s ‘Reading breast cancer’ . health:, 5(2), 269-277 .
54.
Willson, M. (2000). Community in the abstract: A political and ethical dilemma? In D. Bell and B. Kennedy (Eds.), The cybercultures reader, pp. 644-657. London: Routledge .
