Queer/ing and trans/ing science and technology studies: Material-semiotic insights and outlooks from assisted human reproduction
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article draws together science and technology studies (STS) and queer- and transfeminist theory. I argue that queer- and transfeminist STS is about more than simply adding ‘queer and trans people’ to the agenda of STS – just as feminist STS encompasses more than women* and their exclusion from, marginalization within and exploitation through science, technology and biomedicine. Through the lens of queer- and transfeminist STS, I demonstrate the potential of queering and transing assisted reproductive technologies (ART). By challenging the norms of who can reproduce and how, as well as challenging intelligible forms of life and kin-making, queer- and transfeminist STS has already produced new research perspectives and insights on ART. Taken them further with alliances and solidarities, these perspectives open up opportunities for reproduction, future technologies, policies and politics for queer and trans communities.
Keywords: queer- and transfeminist theory, assisted reproductive technology, ethics
Bibliography: Leibetseder, Doris: Kritische Denkerinnen: Eine Annäherung an die Berliner Salonkultur als Katalysator weiblicher Emanzipation, GENDER – Zeitschrift für Geschlecht, Kultur und Gesellschaft, 3-2025, pp. 74-87.
Article Details
Literature
Aizura, Aren Z. (2010). Feminine Transformations: Gender Reassignment Surgical Tourism in Thailand. Medical Anthropology, 29(4), 424–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/01459740.2010.501314
Barad, Karen (1996). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Realism and Social Constructivism without Contradiction. In Lynn H. Nelson & Jack Nelson (eds.), Feminism, Science, and the Philosophy of Science (pp. 161–194). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1742-2_9
Barad, Karen (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822388128
Barad, Karen (2011). Nature’s Queer Performativity. Qui Parle, 19(2), 121–158. https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0121
Barad, Karen (2015). TransMaterialities: Trans*/Matter/Realities and Queer Political Imaginings. GLQ, 21(2–3), 387–422. https://doi.org/10.1215/10642684-2843239
Beatie, Thomas (2008). Labor of Love: Is Society Ready for this Pregnant Husband? The Advocate, 26 March 2008. Date of access: 4 June 2025 at https://www.advocate.com/news/2008/03/26/labor-love.
Beetham, Gwendolyn (2010). Assisted Reproduction as a Queer Thing. The Scholar and Feminist Online, (9.1–9.2). Date of access: 14 September 2024 at http://sfonline.barnard.edu/reprotech/beetham_01.htm.
Berlant, Lauren & Warner, Michael (1995). Guest Column: What Does Queer Theory Teach Us about X? Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 110(3), 343–349. https://doi.org/10.1632/S003081290005937X
Bryant, Karl (2006). Making Gender Identity Disorder of Childhood: Historical Lessons for Contemporary Debates. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 3(3), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1525/srsp.2006.3.3.23
Butler, Judith (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
Butler, Judith (1991). Das Unbehagen der Geschlechter. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
Cipolla, Cyd; Gupta, Kristina; Rubin, David A. & Willey, Angela (2017). Queer Feminist Science Studies: An Introduction. In Cyd Cipolla, Kristina Gupta, David A. Rubin & Angela Willey (eds.), Queer Feminist Science Studies: A Reader (pp. 3–24). Seattle: University of Washington Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780295742595
Clarke, Adele E. (1998). Disciplining Reproduction: Modernity, American Life Sciences, and “the Problems of Sex”. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520310278
Engel, Antke (2013). Lust auf Komplexität. Gleichstellung, Antidiskriminierung und die Strategie des Queerversity. Feministische Studien, 31(1), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1515/fs-2013-0109
Engel, Antke (2024). Queer Theorie – Queer_Pädagogik: Eine Einführung. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa.
Felt, Ulrike; Fouché, Rayovon; Miller, Clark A. & Smith-Doerr, Laurel (2017). Introduction to the Fourth Edition of the Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. In Ulrike Felt, Rayovon
Fouché, Clark A. Miller & Laurel Smith-Doerr (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 1–26). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Finrrage (2016). FINRRAGE – Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering. Date of access: 4 April 2024 at https://www.finrrage.org/.
Firestone, Shulamith (1970). The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution. New York: Bantam.
Fishman, Jennifer R.; Mamo, Laura & Grzanka, Patrick R. (2017). Sex, Gender, and Sexuality in Biomedicine. In Ulrike Felt, Rayovon Fouché, Clark A. Miller & Laurel Smith-Doerr (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 379–406). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Franklin, Sarah (2010). Transbiology: A Feminist Cultural Account of Being After IVF. The Scholar and Feminist Online, (9.1–9.2), 1–17.
Franklin, Sarah (2022). Introduction to the Second Edition. In Sarah Franklin (ed.), Embodied Progress: A Cultural Account of Assisted Conception (pp. 1–17). Abingdon: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003284499
Fox Keller, Evelyn (1985). Reflections on Gender and Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fox Keller, Evelyn (1992). Secrets of Life, Secrets of Death: Essays on Language, Gender, and Science. New York: Routledge.
Griffin, Gabriele & Leibetseder, Doris (2020). Introduction. In Gabriele Griffin & Doris Leibetseder (eds.), Bodily Interventions and Intimate Labour: Understanding Bioprecarity (pp. 1–18). Manchester: Manchester University Press. https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526138576.00005
Griffin, Susan (1987). Frau und Natur: Das Brüllen in ihr. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
Gupta, Kristina & Rubin, David A. (2020). Queer Science Studies/Queer Science. In Sharon Crasnow & Kristen Intemann (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Philosophy of Science (pp. 131–143). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429507731
Gül, Elif & Leibetseder, Doris (2024). Reproduktive Normen und zeitliche Aspekte. In Isabella Marcinski-Michel & Claudia Wiesemann (eds.), Reproduktion und das gute Leben: Intersektionale Perspektiven (pp. 123–145). Bielefeld: transcript.
Halberstam, J. Jack (2008). Revolt/Revolting Animation: Penguin Love, Doll Sex and the Spectacle of the Queer Nonhuman. In Noreen Giffney & Myra J. Hird (eds.), Queering the Non/Human (pp. 265–283). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
Haraway, Donna (1991). A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. In Donna Haraway, Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature (pp. 149–181). New York: Routledge.
Harding, Sandra (1991). Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women’s Lives. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Harding, Sandra (1993). Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is Strong Objectivity? In Linda Alcoff & Elizabeth Potter (eds.), Feminist Epistemologies (pp. 49–82). New York, London: Routledge.
Harding, Sandra (ed.). (2004). The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. New York, London: Routledge.
Haritaworn, Jin; Kuntsman, Adi & Posocco, Silvia (2014). Introduction: Queer Necropolitics. In Jin Haritaworn, Adi Kuntsman & Silvia Posocco (eds.), Queer Necropolitics (pp. 1–20). Abingdon: Routledge.
Harper, Phillip Brian; McClintock, Anne; Muñoz, José E. & Rosen, Trish (1997). Queer Transexions of Race, Nation, and Gender: An Introduction. Social Text, (52/53), 1–4.
Jasanoff, Sheila (2005). Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400837311
Jasanoff, Sheila & Metzler, Ingrid (2018). Borderlands of Life: IVF Embryos and the Law in the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45(6), 1001–1037. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917753990
Kalender, Ute (2012). Queere Potentiale? Zur Queerness von Reproduktionstechnologien aus der Perspektive materialistischer Feminismen und kritischer Disability Studies. Feministische Studien, 30(2), 198–211. https://doi.org/10.1515/fs-2012-0205
Kamel, Remah Moustafa (2013). Assisted Reproductive Technology after the Birth of Louise Brown. Journal of Reproduction & Infertility, 14(3), 96–109.
Kennedy, Helen (2005). Subjective Intersections in the Face of the Machine. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 12(4), 471–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506805057102
Landström, Catharina (2007). Queering Feminist Technology Studies. Feminist Theory, 8(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700107074193
Law, John (2017). STS as Method. In Ulrike Felt, Rayvon Fouché, Clark A. Miller & Laurel Smith-Doerr (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 31–58). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Leibetseder, Doris (2018). Queer Reproduction Revisited and Why Race, Class and Citizenship still Matters: A Response to Cristina Richie. Bioethics, 32(2), 138–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12416
Leibetseder, Doris (2020). Bioprecarity as Categorical Framing. In Gabriele Griffin & Doris Leibetseder (eds.), Bodily Interventions and Intimate Labour: Understanding Bioprecarity (pp. 41–58). Manchester: Manchester University Press. https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526138576
Leibetseder, Doris (2022). Reproductive Technologies for Queer and Trans People. In Ezio Di Nucci, Ji-Young Lee & Isaac Wagner (eds.), The Rowman & Littlefield Handbook of Bioethics
(pp. 260–269). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Leibetseder, Doris & Freude, Leon (2024). Reproductive Homonationalism and In/ter/dependence in Spain and Catalonia: “Feminazis” and Queer and Trans Reproduction. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 26(1), Article 3.
Leibetseder, Doris & Griffin, Gabriele (2019). States of Reproduction: The Co-Production of Queer and Trans Parenthood in three European Countries. Journal of Gender Studies, 29(3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1636773
Leibetseder, Doris & Prietl, Bianca (2025). Kinship and the Value of Intelligible Life: A Queer-Feminist Reflection on Sociotechnical Practices of (E)valuation in E-Reproduction. In Karoline Krenn, Jonathan Kropf, Stefan Laser & Carsten Ochs (eds.), Dynamik digitaler Bewertung: Über Gestaltungsspielräume in Infrastrukturen – von KI bis Queering (pp. 51–71). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Mamo, Laura (2007). Queering Reproduction: Achieving Pregnancy in the Age of Technoscience. Durham: Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822390220
Mamo, Laura (2013). Queering the Fertility Clinic. Journal of Medical Humanities, 34(3), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-013-9210-3
Mamo, Laura & Fishman, Jennifer R. (2013). Why Justice? Introduction to the Special Issue on Entanglements of Science, Ethics, and Justice. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 38(2), 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912473162
McCann, Hannah & Monaghan, Whitney (2019). Queer Theory Now: From Foundations to Futures. London: Red Globe Press.
Mingus, Mia (2015). Medical Industrial Complex Visual. Leaving Evidence, 6 February 2015. Date of access: 31 December 2024 at https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/medical-industrial-complex-visual/.
Molldrem, Stephen & Thakor, Mitali (2017). Genealogies and Futures of Queer STS: Issues in Theory, Method, and Institutionalization. Catalyst, 3(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.28968/cftt.v3i1.28795
Nebeling Peterson, Michael (2015). Between Precarity and Privilege: Claiming Motherhood as Gay Fathers Through Transnational Surrogacy. In Venetia Kantsa, Giulia Zanani, Lina Papadopopoulou (eds.), (In)Fertile Citizens: Anthropological and Legal Challenges of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (pp. 93–100). Athens: Alexandria Publications.
Nordquist, Petra (2008). Feminist Heterosexual Imaginaries of Reproduction: Lesbian Conception in Feminist Studies of Reproductive Technologies. Feminist Theory, 9(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700108095851
Paulitz, Tanja; Prietl, Bianca & Winter, Martin (2022). Technik, Materialität/en, Geschlecht: Eine vergleichende Skizze von Denkstilen der Feministischen Technikforschung. Behemoth, 15(1), 12–29. https://doi.org/10.6094/behemoth.2022.15.1.1070
Pickersgill, Martyn (2013). From ‘Implications’ to ‘Dimensions’: Science, Medicine and Ethics in Society. Health Care Analysis, 21, 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-012-0219-y
Preciado, Beatriz (2008). Testo Yonqui. Madrid: Espasa Calpe. Queer STS Working Group (n.d.). Manifest. Date of access: 6 October 2024 at https://queersts.com/work-group/manifest/.
Roberts, Dorothy (2009). Race, Gender, and Genetic Technologies: A New Reproductive Dystopia? Signs, 34(4), 783–804. https://doi.org/10.1086/597132
Roberts, Dorothy (2011). Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-Create Race in the Twenty-First Century. New York: New Press.
Ross, Loretta J. (2021). Reproductive Justice: Ein Rahmen für eine anti-essentialistische und intersektionale Politik. In Kitchen Politics (eds.), Mehr als Selbstbestimmung! Kämpfe für reproduktive Gerechtigkeit (pp. 17–60). Münster: edition assemblage.
Sandoval, Chela (2000). Methodology of the Oppressed. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
Schiebinger, Londa (1989). The Mind Has No Sex: Women in the Origins of Modern Science. Cambridge/Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Schiebinger, Londa (1993). Nature’s Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science. Boston: Beacon Press.
Smietana, Marcin; Thompson, Charis & Twine, France Winddance (2018). Making and Breaking Families: Reading Queer Reproductions, Stratified Reproduction and Reproductive Justice Together. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society Online, 7, 112–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2018.11.001
Spade, Dean (2007). Methodologies of Trans Resistance. In George E. Haggerty & Molly McGarry (eds.), A Companion to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Studies (pp. 237–261). Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470690864.ch12
Spade, Dean (2011). Normal Life: Administrative Violence, Critical Trans Politics, and the Limits of Law. New York: South End Press.
Subramaniam, Banu; Foster, Laura; Harding, Sandra; Roy, Deboleena & TallBear, Kim (2017). Feminism, Postcolonialism, Technoscience. In Ulrike Felt, Rayovon Fouché, Clark A. Miller & Laurel Smith-Doerr (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 407–434). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Sudenkaarne, Tiia & Blell, Mwenza (2022). Reproductive Justice for the Haunted Nordic Welfare State: Race, Racism, and Queer Bioethics in Finland. Bioethics, 36(3), 328–335. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12973
Thompson, Charis (2005). Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Thompson, Charis (2016). IVF Global Histories, USA: Between Rock and a Marketplace. Reproductive Biomedicine & Society, 10(2), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbms.2016.09.003
UC Davis Humanities Institute (n.d.). Queer, Trans, and Feminist STS Research. Date of access: 6 October 2024 at https://dhi.ucdavis.edu/queer-trans-and-feminist-sts-research.
Weber, Jutta (2017). Feministische STS: Einführung. In Susanne Bauer, Torsten Heinemann & Thomas Lemke (eds.), Science and Technology Studies: Klassische Positionen und aktuelle Perspektiven (pp. 339–368). Berlin: Suhrkamp.