Reading Response #2-- Hierarchies in STEM

Reading Response #2

Mariel Emanuel

ES:410

In the piece “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” authors Bilimoria & Stewart discuss some of the experiences of members of the LGBT community in STEM fields. I think this piece is very interesting because it highlights some of the consequences of lack of diversity within STEM fields. In the study they found that queers students generally “felt invisible both in science contexts and in queer discourses (which often ignore science)” (Bilimoria & Stewart). This is an interesting case that deserves to be looked at because it demonstrates how the lack of intersection of diverse discourses is creating hierarchies of information and affecting the STEM knowledge being produced.

Throughout the formation of STEM fields certain types of knowledge have been prioritized and valued over others. In turn we see the subtle implementation of hierarchies within the STEM fields. This is a problem because not surprisingly the STEM perspective is usually viewed as more important than the humanitarian perspective within the STEM paradigm. This ranking of knowledge is negatively affecting the information/products being produced because it is inevitably separating one type of knowledge from the other when in fact the most beneficial way to approach issues would involve the implementation of an assortment of perspectives.

Our society far too often views human as separate from technology when in reality the two are completely interconnected and the two perspectives should never be evaluated without the other alongside. Same idea applies to the separation of STEM fields from humanities. Putting the two at odds with each other furthers hierarchies and hinders citizens from recognizing the connection between the two fields.

In Faulkner’s piece she calls out STEM for fields for adopting dualisms and hierarchies. I think that this is very interesting because it is the implementation of these dualisms and hierarchies that puts technology at odds with the human and STEM at odds with the Humanities. I enjoyed Faulkner’s articles very much because she is very critical of the role of gender in STEM fields. It is so important to look at the intrinsic qualities that get attached to engineers based on their gender because this highlights some of the innate biases within the field. Since STEM work was created under a patriarchal framework the perspective of the woman has time after time been neglected. Even though we have made huge strides towards increasingly gender equality in STEM fields—the foundation of STEM was built upon dualisms and hierarchies which still subtly linger.

The remnants of patriarchy that still remain in the field are evidently part of the reason why members of the LGBT community felt that there unique perspective was “invisible”. This feeling of neglect is a direct consequence of the lack of diversity in engineering which only facilitates the continual perpetuation of hierarchies. In my opinion in order to successfully confront the current problems with diversity and STEM fields we must tackle the biases inherent within the foundation of the field first.

In order to successfully confront these inherent biases we must focus on how to increase diversity within the field and how to create an atmosphere in which various/diverse perspectives can peacefully co-exist without one being valued over the other. Issues of race and gender cannot be ignored and must taken into consideration when creating new scientific knowledge.