Imagining a Feminist Actor-Network Theory

Feminism And Ant

Feminist scholarship and Actor-Network Theory stem from very different political, intellectual, and historical traditions. ANT grew predominately out of the intellectual movements of post-structuralism and constructivism (Law, 1999). Feminist scholarship, on the other hand, grew from a social and political movement that hinged on eradicating gendered inequality (MacKinnon, 2005). While branches of feminist thought have similar to ANT drawn on post-structuralism and constructivism (e.g., Haraway, 1991; Butler, 2004; Mohanty, 2003), others have been built from theoretical traditions such as Marxism, existentialism, and psychoanalytic theories (Davis, 1981; de Beauvoir, 1957; Benjamin, 1988).

Feminist scholarship is a diverse field made up of many distinct empirical, theoretical, and methodological approaches. To refer to feminist scholarship as a unified tradition of thought and practice is therefore a simplification of its diverse history. In a similar way, the diversity in ANT studies makes the approach difficult, if not impossible, to define in broad terms (Law, 1999). The diversity within these two fields can present a challenge for creating dialogue between them. This paper will therefore utilize very particular definitions of feminist scholarship and ANT. These definitions are not intended to erase the diversity within these fields, but rather, allow for an exploration of what lies between them.