Queerious futures

Consider a birdcage. If you look very closely at just one wire in the cage, you cannot see the other wires. If your conception of what is before you is determined by this myopic focus... [you are] unable to see why a bird would not just fly around the wire any time it wanted to go somewhere.... It is only when you step back, stop looking at the wires one by one, microscopically, and take a macroscopic view of the whole cage, that you can see why the bird does not go anywhere; and then you will see it in a moment. It will require no great subtlety of mental powers. It is perfectly obvious that the bird is surrounded by a network of systematically related barriers, no one of which would be the least hindrance to its flight, but which, by their relations to each other, are as confining as the solid walls of a dungeon [1]. Tracing out unjust networks of systematically related barriers and dismantling interrelated systems of oppression requires the mobilization of anger toward collective action, all potentially mediated through the use of technology. Building technological platforms that afford the mobilization of anger against injustice toward collective critical action remains a complex sociotechnical challenge that warrants further research. But why should we consider queer perspectives when designing technologies for ecologically sustainable collective futures? Shauna M. O’Donnell, with the Editorial Collective of UnderCurrents, says “a politics of nature can no longer be an articulation of white, male, heterosexual prescriptive or descriptive privilege” and calls attention to the “disruptive power of any examination of the normative categories of nature and the natural from the perspective of queer identity” [2]. Queer people’s identities, embodied desires, and lived experiences have This article is the final part of a three-part series exploring entanglements between queer desire and the design of computerrelated technologies. My goal in this article is to articulate how queer perspectives can inform ecological concerns in the context of designing technologies for our collective futures. Pushing back on the notion of the researcher as an apolitical, disinterested observer in STEM-related fields, I will argue for acknowledging and engaging with anger against injustice in the context of designing technologies for ecologically responsible and queerinclusive futures. As a design educator, when I introduce topics about ecological sustainability and social justice in the context of designing technologies for the future, my students have expressed frustration, anger, sadness, shame, hopelessness, and cynicism during class discussions and design-studio sessions. Learning about, working through, and coming to terms with the interrelatedness of various systems of oppression can often be rage inducing, challenging, exhausting, and at times, depressing. Doing ecological activism involves repeatedly exposing oneself to and engaging with interrelated systems of oppression and exploitative practices while witnessing atrocities committed against fellow humans and various forms of life. What ought we to do with our anger at unjust practices in our roles as researchers, educators, activists, and innovators? During her keynote presentation at the 1981 National Women’s Studies Association Conference, Black lesbian feminist Audre Lorde argued that “anger expressed and translated into action in the service of our vision and our future is a liberating and strengthening act of clarification.” Lorde advocated for tapping into anger as an “important source of empowerment” while fighting against interrelated systems of oppression. Expressing, contextualizing, amplifying, recognizing, and channeling anger at injustice for collective transformation of futures, hopefully toward the betterment of life for all, is made possible and shaped through technology-mediated interactions. Lorde distinguishes anger from hatred and insists that anger can be “potentially useful against those oppressions, personal and institutional, which brought that anger into being” when facing interrelated systems of oppression. Therefore, it is vital to acknowledge and engage with anger at injustice as a legitimate epistemic positionality while doing sociotechnical research. It can be politically productive and thus has an important place in the design of technologies for the future. There is a growing interest in HCI toward intersectional approaches in order to understand how various systems of oppression such as sexism, racism, and classicism are related. Lesbian feminist Marilyn Frye uses a powerful metaphor of a birdcage to illuminate the struggles and experiences of oppressed people that is worth quoting here at length: