Cyborg Manifesto

Why is it that Donna Haraway feels it is necessary to write in an extended metaphor, using the Cyborg as some sort of euphemism for second generation feminism? Honestly, I think it would be a whole lot easier to just come out and say what she has to, instead of veiling her criticisms behind a creation of science fiction. I guess what I am trying to say is, I found this reading a little confusing. Personally I would think it would be a whole lot easier if Ms. Haraway would just simply state what she has to say, because I already find feminism hard enough to follow. I just find it hard to relate to the subject, I do not really have any similar feelings to compare with feminist points of view, mainly because I am a guy but whatever; maybe I am not trying hard enough. I have always felt that people should be proud of their race, gender and any other facet of their personality that makes them unique. Haraway, apparently would like to see the world transcend gender. She says "the cyborg is a creature in a post-gender world; it has no truck with bisexuality, pre-oedipal symbiosis, unalienated labour, or other seductions to organic wholeness through a final appropriation of all the powers of the parts into a higher unity."

Ironically Haraway's 1985 essay is very prevalent today. Especially her comment about the "need for political unity to confront effectively the dominations of 'race,' 'gender,' 'sexuality,' and 'class.'" However, it is my own personal belief that we have reached this "political unity" by embracing our differences and moving on to the real issues at hand, not by ignoring the elephant in the room. If we were all more open an honest with our feelings and such, we would probably not have seem that different to one another.

Why is it that Haraway would "rather be a cyborg than a goddess?" I think her argument is she would rather be looked at first as a person with a personality and unique individuality rather than a woman first and whatever comes next second. I agree wholeheartedly. When I interact with people for the first time I hope they approach me with an open mind and no preconceived notions, rather than pigeon holing me into a specific category. Unfortunately, I think this is just how we are programmed, to judge. Hopefully we are leaning towards a society that will judge on other qualities in our realm of control, rather than the ones outside it. I think she is also talking about the blurring of boundaries between nature, culture and technology. As technology "improves" we are losing our identities. "Another of my premises is that the need for unity of people trying to resist world-wide intensification of domination has never been more acute. But a slightly perverse shift of perspective might better enable us to contest for meanings, as well as for other forms of power and pleasure in technologically mediated societies."
New technology can make life easier and faster with instant gratification, but at what cost?