How a new generation of cyberfeminists is hacking not just patriarchal code, but patriarchal concepts of biology itself
Imagine a future where technology doesn't just connect us to the internet, but rewires our very understanding of life itself. This is the new frontier of cyberfeminism, a movement that began in the 1990s with radical visions of gender liberation through digital technology but is now evolving to confront one of our most fundamental domains: biology itself.
What if we could hack not just patriarchal code, but patriarchal concepts of biology? How can technology help us reimagine reproduction, gender, and even our physical forms?
As we stand at the crossroads of genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing, a new generation of cyberfeminists is asking these provocative questions. This article explores how cyberfeminism is being reinvented at the intersection of digital and biological sciences, creating powerful new frameworks for understanding—and potentially transforming—the building blocks of life.
Community-based groups exploring biological technologies through feminist frameworks.
Projects challenging Western scientific paradigms and incorporating indigenous knowledge.
Cyberfeminism emerged in the early 1990s as a response to the male-dominated landscape of early internet technology. The term was independently coined by British cultural theorist Sadie Plant and the Australian artist collective VNS Matrix, who declared in their 1991 Cyberfeminist Manifesto their intention to "insert women, bodily fluids and political consciousness into electronic spaces" 1 4 .
These early cyberfeminists often took a utopian view of cyberspace as a means of freedom from social constructs such as gender and race 1 . For Sadie Plant, cyberfeminism represented the inherent connections between women and technology, viewing both as non-linear, self-replicating systems naturally suited to making connections 4 .
| Project/Initiative | Year | Key Contribution |
|---|---|---|
| VNS Matrix's "Cyberfeminist Manifesto" | 1991 | First articulation of cyberfeminist principles; combined art with French feminist theory |
| Sadie Plant's "Zeros and Ones" | 1990s | Explored historical connections between women and technology |
| Old Boys Network's "First Cyberfeminist International" | 1997 | Created "100 Anti-Theses" refusing to define cyberfeminism |
| Linda Dement's computer game art | 1990s | Constructed alternative female identities through digital media |
By the early 2000s, a significant shift occurred as cyberfeminists began rejecting what scholar Jessica Brophy termed "cyberutopia"—the idealized theory that internet users could or should leave their bodies behind when online 3 . This new perspective centrally located corporeality and embodiment in feminist technology studies, recognizing that our physical experiences—shaped by gender, race, class, and ability—fundamentally influence our interactions with technology 3 .
This "corporeal cyberfeminism" employed the concept of intra-agency to understand the complex relationships between users and technology 3 . Rather than viewing technology as either purely liberating or oppressive, this approach examined how our embodied experiences and technologies mutually shape one another.
It acknowledged that online spaces don't erase our physical realities but create liminal spaces where digital and physical identities intersect and influence each other 3 . This theoretical evolution paved the way for cyberfeminism to engage more directly with biological sciences.
The latest evolution in cyberfeminist thought represents a dramatic shift from the digital to the biological realm. While early cyberfeminism focused primarily on internet technologies and virtual spaces, contemporary cyberfeminist projects increasingly engage with what the collective Laboria Cuboniks has termed "the politics of reproduction" 4 .
In the 2010s, xenofeminism emerged as a distinctive strand within the cyberfeminist tradition, established by the collective Laboria Cuboniks 4 . Their manifesto, "Xenofeminism: A Politics for Alienation," challenges the notion of nature as fixed and inherently desirable, proposing instead a future where traditional categories of gender are decoupled from societal power structures 4 .
| Phase | Primary Focus | View of Technology | Key Theorists/Collectives |
|---|---|---|---|
| First Wave (1990s) | Digital spaces and internet technologies | Liberatory potential for escaping gender | VNS Matrix, Sadie Plant |
| Corporeal Turn (2000s) | Embodiment and physical experience | Shaped by and shaping bodily differences | Jessica Brophy, Faith Wilding |
| Xenofeminism (2010s+) | Biological technologies and reproduction | Tool for dismantling naturalized hierarchies | Laboria Cuboniks |
To understand how contemporary cyberfeminist principles are being applied in biological research, let's examine a hypothetical but representative experiment conducted by a feminist biohacking collective. This study investigates the gender and racial biases in public genetic databases—a crucial question as personalized medicine increasingly relies on these datasets.
Researchers identified three major public genetic databases: the 1000 Genomes Project, the UK Biobank, and the Genome Aggregation Database (gnomAD).
The team developed algorithmic tools to analyze the representation of different population groups across these databases, with particular attention to sex chromosomes and ancestral genetic markers.
They selected 50 medically significant genetic variants and tracked how these variants were described and categorized in clinical literature.
The collective created alternative visualization tools that represented genetic diversity along non-binary frameworks, challenging traditional categorical approaches to sex and ancestry.
The researchers partnered with underserved communities to develop participatory approaches to genetic data collection and interpretation.
The findings revealed significant gaps and biases in how genetic data is collected, categorized, and interpreted:
The databases predominantly categorized individuals as XX or XY, with limited representation of chromosomal variations such as XXY (Klinefelter syndrome) or X0 (Turner syndrome).
Certain populations, particularly those of European descent, were dramatically overrepresented, potentially limiting the effectiveness of genetic medicine for underrepresented groups.
Genetic variants were more likely to be classified as "pathogenic" when found in non-European populations, even when clinical significance was uncertain.
| Population Group | 1000 Genomes Project | UK Biobank | gnomAD | Ideal Representation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| European Ancestry | 42% | 88% | 60% | 30% |
| East Asian Ancestry | 27% | 2% | 12% | 25% |
| African Ancestry | 19% | 3% | 9% | 20% |
| South Asian Ancestry | 8% | 5% | 11% | 15% |
| Indigenous Americas | 4% | 0.5% | 0.8% | 5% |
| Other/Underrepresented | <1% | 1.5% | 7.2% | 5% |
The research team developed what they termed "fuzzy inheritance maps"—visualization tools that represented genetic relationships outside traditional family tree models, making space for queer kinship structures and non-biological inheritance patterns.
Contemporary cyberfeminist projects employ a diverse array of methodological approaches and technical tools to challenge and reimagine biological research:
Analyzing genetic data while acknowledging the social and historical context of scientific categories.
ApplicationDeveloping algorithms that recognize the fluidity of biological sex and the social construction of race.
Ensuring marginalized communities have agency in research processes.
ApplicationCreating ethical frameworks for genetic studies that prioritize informed consent and community benefit.
Democratizing access to biotechnology through affordable, accessible equipment.
ApplicationDIY CRISPR kits adapted for community labs with ethical guidelines developed collectively.
Examining how multiple axes of identity interact in biological contexts.
ApplicationStudying health disparities through frameworks that acknowledge structural rather than purely biological causes.
The reinvention of cyberfeminism at the intersection of technology and biology represents one of the most exciting developments in contemporary feminist thought. By bringing critical feminist perspectives to bear on both digital and biological technologies, this movement offers powerful tools for reimagining our physical selves and our relationship to the natural world.
The new cyberfeminists recognize that biology is not destiny—but neither is it irrelevant. Instead, they approach the body as both a site of political struggle and a potential platform for reinvention.
In doing so, they reclaim the original cyberfeminist commitment to "carnality with code; machines, blood and bad language; poetry and disdain; executables, theft and creative fabrication" that Linda Dement described 1 .
As we face a future of rapidly accelerating biological technologies—from gene editing to artificial wombs—the cyberfeminist insistence on asking "for whom?" and "to what end?" becomes increasingly vital. The project is no longer just about creating inclusive digital spaces, but about ensuring that the technologies that will reshape our very biology work to liberate rather than constrain, to diversify rather than homogenize, and to empower rather than control.