Search

This paper examines the relationship between conceptual and embodied reasoning in engineering work. In the last decade across multiple research projects on pipeline engineering, we have observed only a few times when engineers have expressed embodied or sensory aspects of their practice, as if the activity itself is disembodied. Yet, they also often speak about the importance of field experience. In this paper, we look at engineers’ accounts of the value of field experience showing how it works on their sense of what the technology that they are designing looks, feels, and sounds like in practice, and so what this means for construction and operation, and the management of risk. We show how office-based pipeline engineering work is an exercise in embodied imagination that humanizes the socio-technical system as it manifests in the technical artifacts that they work with. Engineers take the role of the other to reason through the practicability of their designs and risk acceptability.

Research on tech workers has often focused on racial inequalities within the industry but has failed to seriously consider Asian American professionals as racialized subjects. This paper addresses this knowledge gap by centering Asian Americans as workers whose racial identity impacts their career trajectory and professional experiences in the high-tech industry. Based on 57 interviews with Asian American tech professionals, I find that Asian Americans use four main racial strategies to deflect or confront racism in the workplace Three of these racial strategies—racial maneuvering, essentializing, distancing— intentionally remove Asian Americans from the glare of racism. The fourth racial strategy, dissenting, acknowledges racism; workers using this racial strategy are often so frustrated by the white power structure of the high-tech industry that they find no other choice but to leave mainstream organizations. Several of these racial strategies are reinforced by local racial politics and the historical influence of Asian immigrant workers that helped shape both Silicon Valley and Asian American culture in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Diagnoses are powerful tools that fulfill various practical and symbolic functions. In this paper, I examine how a contested diagnosis called orthorexia nervosa has been taken up by users on Instagram, where tens of thousands of posts engage with the topic, many of them from individuals who identify with the condition. I put scholarship on medicalization and diagnosis in conversation with literature on subcultures to foreground the subversive work that is enabled through this diagnosis. Drawing on more than 350 hours of online ethnographic fieldwork and 34 in-depth interviews, I examine how participants construct a shared identity, draw on common language and norms, and undertake collective practices, as they negotiate dominant understandings of health. I show how they draw on the legitimacy endowed by the diagnostic label to validate and make sense of experiences of suffering but also to counter dominant health-seeking discourses, practices, and aesthetics in an online space where these are highly visible and valued. I also discuss some ways Instagram as a digital platform shapes its uptake by this community in meaningful ways. On the one hand, participants draw heavily on the language and framing of medicine to make sense of their fraught experiences with food and their bodies, effectively advocating for the medicalization of their own suffering while also creating a sense of community and shared identity. However, on the other hand, they actively use the diagnosis and the recovery process enabled through it to effectively resignify dominant beliefs, values, and practices that are experienced as injurious, including some that are particularly prevalent on Instagram.