PDF(1703 KB)
Shaped by AI: The Multiple Masculinities of “Zhiban Dad”
ZHU Lin, YUAN Yan
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2023, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (4) : 50-69.
PDF(1703 KB)
PDF(1703 KB)
Shaped by AI: The Multiple Masculinities of “Zhiban Dad”
Since 2016, a large number of children companion robots have emerged in the Chinese mainland market, and these robots have entered thousands of families in China as childcare domestic smart media. At present, most of the research focuses on the gender of the robot, and there is a lack of in-depth and detailed discussions on the people who produce robots, as well as the complex relationship between people and technology in the production process. In order to deeply explore the AI technology and human gender mutual shaping, a six-month ethnography in a well-known technology company was conducted to investigate. Authors of this paper have personally participated in the development of a children companion robot. The study found that, the technology of children companion robot is masculine, and the masculinity of this technology also consolidates the “hegemony” masculinity of the “Zhiban Dad”. However, the masculinity of technology will also change in the process of technology implementation. In order to meet users’ needs for “parenting”, perceptual femininity and personal experience of motherhood are needed, which also urges “Zhiban Dad” to actively make a “compromise” of masculinity in technical practice. The emergence of masculinities shows that technology and gender are not essentialism, they shape each other in practice. The masculinity adjustment of “Zhiban Dad” also provides an opportunity for the appearance of negotiable gender robots. In short, clarifying the masculinities generation mechanism of the producer “Zhiban Dad” will help to understand the male gender and masculinities of current children companion robots.
domestic smart media / children companion robot / male engineer / masculinities
| [1] |
2019中国人工智能机器人企业排名,华为成未来Top100榜首(2019). 检索于 https://www.sohu.com/a/361290693_202023.
|
| [2] |
2020年全球智能陪伴教育机器人行业市场现状调研报告(2020).检索于 https://www.163.com/dy/article/FP26RC920514E30D.html.
|
| [3] |
安庄好(2019). 机器人的世界,不应有性别偏见——由“2019世界机器人大会”想到的.检索于 http://www.cnwomen.com.cn/2019/09/06/99172204.html.
|
| [4] |
白馥兰(2013/2017). 《技术、性别、历史:重新审视帝制中国的大转型》(吴秀杰,白岚玲译). 南京: 江苏人民出版社.
|
| [5] |
曹晋, 刘亭利(2018). 都市中年男人的同性社交与媒介化家庭沟通. 《新闻界》,(2),63-72.
|
| [6] |
陈静(2017). 科技与伦理走向融合——论人工智能技术的人文化. 《学术界》,(9),102-111.
|
| [7] |
陈小平 (2020年03月30日).我们对人工智能的误解有多深.《北京日报》,A18.
|
| [8] |
蔡玉萍, 彭铟旎(2019). 《男性妥协:中国的城乡迁移、 家庭和性别》. 北京: 生活·读书·新知三联书店.
|
| [9] |
程思琪, 喻国明(2021). 人工智能技术路线的洞察与人机传播新范式的构建. 《全球传媒学刊》,(1),19-34.
|
| [10] |
何绍辉(2020). 撑起儿童照顾的“半边天”——对父职实践的社会学考察. 《中国青年研究》,(2),85-91.
|
| [11] |
韩婴(1980). 《韩诗外传集释》(许维遹校释). 北京: 中华书局.
|
| [12] |
罗晓东(2016). “暖男”符号及其性别实践和话语转型探究. 《当代青年研究》,(2),77-81.
|
| [13] |
理安·艾斯勒(1987/2009). 《圣杯与剑:我们的历史, 我们的未来》(程志民译)(第1版). 北京: 社会科学文献出版社.
|
| [14] |
路易斯·摩尔根(1967/2000). 《古代社会》(刘峰译)(第1版). 北京: 京华出版社.
|
| [15] |
刘易斯·芒福德(1966/2017).《机器神话: 技术发展与人文进步(上)》(宋俊岭译)(第1版). 上海: 三联书店.
|
| [16] |
刘霓(2002). 技术与男性气质:应予瓦解的等式——女性主义技术研究述评. 《国外社会科学》,(4),66-72.
|
| [17] |
马庆钰(1998). 论家长本位与“权威主义人格”——关于中国传统政治文化的一种分析. 《中国人民大学学报》,(5),50-55.
|
| [18] |
施路平, 裴京, 赵蓉(2020). 面向人工通用智能的类脑计算. 《人工智能》,(1),6-15.
|
| [19] |
苏·卡利·詹森(2002/2007). 《批判的传播理论:权力、 媒介、社会性别和科技》(曹晋译)(第1版). 上海: 复旦大学出版社.
|
| [20] |
王亮(2022). “新父职”研究:概念厘清、理论脉络与研究展望. 《中国青年研究》,(6),110-118.
|
| [21] |
王向贤(2019). 转型时期的父亲责任、权利与研究路径——国内父职社会学研究述评. 《青年研究》,(1),84-93.
|
| [22] |
王志成(2015). “暖男”:新世纪都市语境中影视剧的男性形象建构. 《文艺争鸣》,(2),190-193.
|
| [23] |
王向贤(2011年7月).“共和国的工业长子”——男性气质与大型国有企业男性工人.“中国社会学年会”会议论文.南昌.
|
| [24] |
吴璟薇, 张雅迪(2022). 数字实践中的“混合父职”建构:爸爸博主的在线自我呈现. 《妇女研究论丛》,(2),70-84.
|
| [25] |
熊秉真(2000). 《童年忆往:中国孩子的历史》. 台北: 麦田出版社.
|
| [26] |
袁艳, 朱琳(2021). AI(爱)心陪伴:中国儿童陪伴机器人的网络化身体与多重男性气质. 《传播与社会学刊》(香港),(57),225-254.
|
| [27] |
佚名(2018). 工信部:2020年实现儿童教育等家庭服务机器人批量生产应用. 《家庭服务》,(11),38.
|
| [28] |
《中国制造2025》解读之:推动机器人发展(2016). 检索于 http://www.gov.cn/zhuanti/2016-05/12/content_5072768.htm.
|
| [29] |
詹姆斯·凯瑞(1989/2005). 《作为文化的传播》(丁未译)(第1版). 北京: 华夏出版社.
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
In this article we focus on a group of fathers who use parental leave and how they include care-giving in their construction of masculinity. The fathers shape their own masculine form of care-work differently from the mothers' interaction with the child. Both mothers and fathers, however, take part in the process of reproducing masculinity as the norm by giving masculine care higher status. Care-giving activities are adopted by the hegemonic form of masculinity with its strong connection to paid work.
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
The focus of my inquiry in this article is the figure of the Human that is enacted in the design of the humanoid robot. The humanoid or anthropomorphic robot is a model (in)organism, engineered in the roboticist’s laboratory in ways that both align with and diverge from the model organisms of biology. Like other model organisms, the laboratory robot’s life is inextricably infused with its inherited materialities and with the ongoing — or truncated — labours of its affiliated humans. But while animal models are rendered progressively more standardised and replicable as tools for the biological sciences, the humanoid robot is individuated and naturalised. Three stagings of human— robot encounters (with the robots Mertz, Kismet and Robota respectively) demonstrate different possibilities for conceptualising these subject objects, for the claims about humanness that they corporealise, and for the kinds of witnessing that they presuppose.
|
| [50] |
|
| [51] |
|
1. 在弱人工智能阶段,人机交互的内容主要靠人生产,“男主内,女主外”的家庭劳动分工使“女性更懂育儿”成为一种社会共识。因此,面向儿童的机器人生产主要靠女性设计人机交互剧本,比如为机器人生产场景、故事、话术、语料等。
2. 机器人智能系统的资源管理平台主要涉及人机交互的场景、事件、话轮、话术、语料等资源的投喂、修改、维护等。
3. 指女性不积极生产人机交互剧本。
4. 调查发现,由女工程师来设计人机交互剧本,也让机器人妈妈的地位得到了提高,机器人龙龙口中的妈妈从最开始“妈妈是做饭的”或者“我有好几个妈妈”变为“妈妈会画画”“她是我最重要的人”。
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |