Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Gender, Pathology, Spectacle 63<br />
radio (Douglas, 1991), and psychological effects of television on children<br />
(Spigel, 1992). Public discussion about <strong>the</strong> telephone addressed appropriate<br />
and inappropriate uses of <strong>the</strong> phone in gendered terms: women<br />
were said to waste <strong>the</strong> technology with gossip whereas men used it for<br />
serious business (Fischer, 1992, p. 231; Lubar, 1992, p. 32; Marvin, 1988,<br />
p. 23). Disease and drug metaphors were attached to radio (Douglas,<br />
1991, p. xv), and Spigel (1992) describes how <strong>the</strong> incorporation of <strong>the</strong><br />
radio into <strong>the</strong> space of <strong>the</strong> home was met with an astute concentration<br />
on how it could be used without distracting women from <strong>the</strong>ir necessary<br />
domestic responsibilities or disrupting accepted gender roles (see<br />
also Wilkins, 1931). Later, similar fears arose with television. Spigel<br />
describes <strong>the</strong> particularly gendered narratives through which television<br />
was installed into <strong>the</strong> home, and pays particular attention to <strong>the</strong><br />
public discourse surrounding, and management of, concerns regarding<br />
television’s potential to disrupt <strong>the</strong> gendered order of <strong>the</strong> home. NBC,<br />
for example, managed gender by suggesting that women could make<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir domestic chores more pleasant by organizing and performing <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
tasks around <strong>the</strong>ir favorite television programs (p. 86).<br />
Similarly, worries about computer technologies focused, at least in<br />
part, on concerns about how <strong>the</strong> new machine might disrupt or overturn<br />
traditional gender and family ideals. Fafl ick (1982), for example,<br />
described “how families come apart in <strong>the</strong> face of <strong>the</strong> micro invasion”<br />
(p. 80). It is well-known that <strong>the</strong> introduction of computers into U.S.<br />
culture did not occur without struggle, that it required much work to<br />
rearticulate computers from being feared (masculine) war machines into<br />
“friendly” household appliances (Reed, 2000). Early in <strong>the</strong> history of<br />
computing, <strong>the</strong> “friendship” between people and computers was largely<br />
a friendship between men and <strong>the</strong>ir computers, and it was during this<br />
time that <strong>the</strong> term “computer widow” emerged (cf. Van Dusen, 1983).<br />
Articles such as “My Husband’s Computer Was My Competition” (Scott,<br />
1982) counseled women about how to cope with <strong>the</strong>ir husbands’ neglect<br />
as a result of his “computer enthusiasm” (Hollands, 1985). O<strong>the</strong>r books<br />
and articles similarly “guided” families about how to bring <strong>the</strong> computer<br />
into <strong>the</strong> home with minimal interruption (Levine, 1983; Joan & Levine<br />
et al., 1984; Wollman, 1984). A 1982 issue of <strong>the</strong> Saturday Evening Post, for<br />
example, included, “A Family Computer Album” and declared, “When in<br />
need of answers or entertainment, families in this Midwest community<br />
are fi nding <strong>the</strong>ir computer a friend indeed” (Olsen, 1982, p. 71). Photo<br />
captions throughout Olsen’s essay emphasized <strong>the</strong> computer as friend<br />
of <strong>the</strong> family, both in terms of friendly interactions with individuals,<br />
as well as being a friend to <strong>the</strong> notion or concept of <strong>the</strong> “family” as a<br />
social institution.