Gender Equality in the Era of 'Human Augmentation': Technology Transfer for Conservation, Quality Education & Gender Equality; Case Studies from the Global South

 

A side event to the 7th Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science, Technology, and Innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals (STI Forum), to be held on 5-6 May 2022 by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs - Sustainable Development.

Gihan S. Soliman 

International Curricula Educators Association

Gender Equality in the Era of 'Human Augmentation': Technology Transfer for Conservation, Quality Education & Gender Equality; Case Studies from the Global South

WATCH VIDEO

Technology has surely enhanced human performance to an unprecedented level. Technology may also have its downside in that it intensifies inequality among people, genders, species, and nations. The 'Human Augmentation: The Dawn of a New Paradigm' is a recent publication by the UK Ministry of Defence designed to set the foundations for more detailed research and development of Human Augmentation. Human Augmentation [1], also known as, the Human Enhancement or Human 2.0 is not in fact a new concept. What’s new, and indeed considered a paradigm shift, is that the publication accepts Human Augmentation as a form of evolutionary advancement in the Darwinian sense (as seen in the illustration). A concept that I presented back nine years ago in a form of an Open Letter to the IUCN World Congress 2014 proposing that ‘We Are NOT just another species’ [2] and that the correction of the human taxonomic identity is way overdue; that we are rather a highly-complex kingdom of life, so to speak, comprising a biological, physical, and socioeconomic entanglement that I called the Homocybernetica [3]. The issue with the Human Augmentation perspective, though, is that it reduces the evolutionary advancement in the human organisation to a matter of ‘size’ with an implication that enhancement is guaranteed. It also represents human beings as mere users of technology and subject to its modification, disregarding the fundamental distinction as the ‘innovator’ or the maker of technology and thus overlooking the role of communication and socio-economics, as well as justice and equality in this evolution. Such disregard is alarming because technology is generally mediated by a socio-economic system deeply rooted in inequality and competition and might, if not appropriately addressed, continue to intensify injustice among people, genders and species - and that is a recipe for failure in the long run. The more viable route is to focus on the unity of kind, the role of communication, and the mobilisation of energy into our organisation through social and eco-friendly innovation not necessarily as a moral choice but simply for survival. We need to remember that the first form of technology was ‘making a fire’ and the first form of mass technology was organic agriculture and that augmentation does not necessarily make us better, more adaptive, or more efficient as the expression and illustration imply. Two study cases from Mexico (De la Chinampas) and Bolivia (PROINPA) showed alternative technology integrated successfully into the community with other non-invasive forms of technology to enhance production, social solidarity, and resilience while preserving the environment and species.

Reference List:

[1] Human Augmentation – The Dawn of a New Paradigm. 2021.A think-piece designed to set the foundation for more detailed research and development on human augmentation. Ministry of Defence of the United Kingdom.

[2] G. Soliman. 2014.We are not Just another Species;An Open Letter to the IUCNWorld Park Congress 2014,Australia. International-Curricula Educators Association.Available at http://www.icea-global.org/Publications.html. Accessed on 03/05/22.

[3] G. Soliman. 2019.‘Cybernetic Recombination, on the Biology of Technology, Revisiting Linnaeus Kingdom Minerals’ in G.Soliman. 2022.The Cybernetic Animal & the Shortfall in Taxonomy.The Cybernetic Society.Available at https://cybsoc.org/?p=2206&fbclid=IwAR15hpQCu2bpGaaYULVsjjeDy3oklBA6YbZ6zksEOmi5QGXnTlNLuSuFlWA.Accessed on 03/05/22.

Janet Frame: International Women's Day Story Time!

Janet Frame 1924 – 2004

Escaped a scheduled lobotomy when, just days before the procedure, her short stories collection debut was unexpectedly awarded a national literary prize. Lobotomy was a cruel mind-altering procedure performed mostly (84%) on women who were expected to be docile and submissive, but instead, were (annoyingly) anxious and ambitious. The procedure was often performed without requiring the consent of the 'patient' and sometimes without their knowledge.

Between lobotomy and witch hunts that allowed murdering 'suspected' women with no repercussions, intelligent women were often penalised (and conditioned into) passiveness and imposed incompetence. Today many women around the world are still facing modern forms of lobotomy and witch hunts as well, in addition to the well-established gender bias in the field of science and technology, leadership and land ownership.

Another form of 'taming' women into docility and submission is Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Female is the forced removal of external (young) female genitalia with the aim of curbing their sexual drive so that they are better and 'calmer' future wives. Despite the global condemnation of the practice, more than 200 million girls and women alive today have been cut as such. FGM is mostly carried out on girls between infancy and age 15.

The long-term consequences of such historic and ongoing conditioning of women are devastating for women, communities, and the planet. Gender inequality has resulted in an economic system based in extraction and exploitation while a body of evidence shows that expanding opportunities for women and girls reduced poverty and enhanced ecosystems (ILO 2016; UNDP 2016a; UN Women 2014; World Bank 2011). 

Dear women, you are wonderful, you are capable, you can do it! Keep fighting for your rights and those of your sisters in humanity for a better future.

Here the story ends, or does it?

Happy International Women's Day!