Talk:Donna Haraway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Not a "deconstructionist"[edit]

I removed the word "deconstructionist" from the line "her deconstructionist view of science," simply because Haraway is no such thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


"As a postmodern feminist, she argues against essentialism, which she defines as "any theory that claims to identify a universal, transhistorical, necessary cause or constitution of gender identity or patriarchy" ("Feminist Epistemology")." What's the exact source, i.e. page number? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:12, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Her definition of 'essentialism' is nowhere near the usual one. "[E]ssentialism is the view that, for any specific kind of entity, there is a set of characteristics or properties all of which any entity of that kind must possess." -- Wikipedia. This is typical. What Ms. Haraway does in her writings is redefine concepts "metaphorically" and then show how they are wrong -- she sets up a straw man and burns it. Even though her work is self-contradictory and full of slipshod thought and emotionalism, she is immune to criticism because people are afraid to be thought stupid for not understanding what she says, when in fact what she says often doesn't make any sense. What is desperately needed in this article is a section on criticism of her work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
What is "typical" is the condescension to be found in using the salutation “Ms.” when Dr. or Prof. are appropriate. Also "typical" would be your clear unfamiliarity with the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
That is the philosophical definition of essentialism. -- Ollyoxenfree (talk) 04:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Additional Sources[edit]

Here are a few sources that could help clarify her theoretical perspective, particularly her thoughts on cyborgs which needs to be addressed in better detail on this page:

Butler, Judith, and Joan W. Scott. Feminists Theorize the Political. New York: Routledge, 1992. Print.

Haraway, Donna J. The Haraway Reader. New York: Routledge, 2003. Print.

Haraway, Donna J. Modest₋witness@second₋millennium.femaleman₋meets₋oncomouse: Feminism and Technoscience. New York: Routledge, 1997. Print.

Haraway, Donna J. Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge, 1991. Print.

Latimer, Heather. "Reproductive Technologies, Fetal Icons, and Genetic Freaks: Shelley Jackson’s Patchwork Girl and the Limits and Possibilities of Donna Haraway’s Cyborg." Modern Fiction Studies 57.2 (2011): 318-335. Print.

Prins, Baukje. "The Ethics of Hybrid Subjects: Feminist Constructivism According to Donna Haraway." Science, Technology, & Human Values 20.3 (1995): 352-367. Print.

Carolynd24 (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Lead section and Early life[edit]

In order to make the article fit better with the standard form of biographical Wikipedia entries and to highlight the influences of her education and upbringing on her later work, I am removing the section regarding her education and placing a refashioned version in a section titled Early Life. I am largely rewriting the paragraph regarding her education because it lacked any citations in its previous form and contained inaccuracies. I think it is important to have a bit more accurate information about her formative years. She is clearly important enough to justify an in depth discussion of her various works and it would be useful to see what influenced her and where she may have gotten some of those ideas.

As an aside I am currently enrolled in a Master’s of Information class that is participating in Wikiproject Wikipedia and Wikipedia Ambassador program encouraging graduate student participation in contributing to Wikipedia. This is my first time editing an article so if I make any rookie mistakes please let me know.

Andrewp1986 (talk) 02:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)Andrewp1986

Article organization[edit]

I am making some changes that I hope will make it easier to find information within this article. I am streamlining the lead section by removing publication information that is difficult to read in its current form and is duplicated in the "Publications" section. I am also bringing the "Publications" section forward to make that information more prominent and the page more useful to users. As well, I am changing the misleading "Haraway's books" heading to a more accurate heading. I have also added ISBN information to make the original works easier to access.

AndreaLynn11 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC).

The citations are not in standard Wikipedia format. Further, the article is not written from a neutral point of view. It leaves me wondering whether Donna herself wrote this hagiography, or had one of her students write it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:45, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Criticism Section[edit]

Is this really necessary for this Author? A Majority of what's written is just on her writing style I think other articles cover this, as it's a common criticism against Post-Modern Writers I think are covered elsewhere (Such as the Sokal Affair) I'd like to suggest something more specific to her ideas if a section is necessary. It is mentioned she has a vague methodology but there is few concrete examples given. I have not read any of her work other than what's in the article so I can't give any further suggestions (talk) 07:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I have to agree in a way. I arrived at this page seeing Cyborg Feminism in the "See Also" section of the article Reproduction and pregnancy in speculative fiction. Looking at the Cyborg Feminism section on the Donna Haraway article, I see nothing there that is actually meaningful or value-added about cyborg feminism. I still have no idea what cyborg feminism actually is and why it should have been at the "See Also" section.

Generally, in an article on "X", any encyclopedia needs to be able to give at least a summary answer to the question "What is 'X'"? I learned about the Five W's in public elementary school: who, what, where, when, why, how. Those are the questions that need to be asked and answered. An encyclopedia has to have more informational heft than a PowerPoint presentation - and this article doesn't fail in that way since it does give particulars - but it also has to at least be as efficient as an executive summary. Vincent Ree (talk) 01:02, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Donna Haraway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)