of social work, Beverley Burke
and Philomena Harrison write
that “[a]n understanding of [anti-oppressive] principles brings with
it a fundamental transformation in
the relationship that exists between
the assessment of a situation and the
nature of the action that is required
to change the existing state of
affairs.” We suggest that this notion
is equally relevant in our field of
interaction design.
If presented with the choice to work
on an existing or nascent project, one
can ask: What oppression would this
work strive to eliminate? On what
level? At which intersections? On the
other hand, if one is in a position to
define a new project or enterprise,
one can choose an oppression or an
intersection of special interests and
search for a solution.
Obviously problematic endeavors
(e.g., military contracts) will be quickly
weeded out by this analysis, and more
nuanced shortcomings may also be.
A common example is the dichotomy
between social service and social
change. Some projects may be focused
on providing assistance to those affected
by oppression without much interest
in disrupting the structures that make
it possible. While this kind of work
is important and praiseworthy, it is
at odds with the definition of anti-oppression given above.
Burke and Harrison also write “the
anti-oppressive principle of reflexivity
demands that workers continually
consider the ways in which their own
social identity and values affect [their
work].” This concept is also applicable in
the interaction design context. We must
recognize that we may not have a good
understanding of the oppressions we
seek to work against and must therefore
educate ourselves as a first order of
business. We must also recognize our
technical biases and be prepared to
acknowledge that the best solution may
end up being a non-technical one.
At Sassafras Tech Collective, a
worker-cooperative tech consultancy
created by the authors, this is the
approach we have taken. Our vision
document, which we refer to when
deciding what work to pursue, lays
out our understanding of oppression.
We favor projects with a background
research component, and several of
our main projects grew out of doctoral
studies. Below, we review some
examples of how the anti-oppression
framework has guided our work.
Hollaback is a social movement
organization dedicated to ending street
harassment, or public harassment
motivated by gender, gender expression,
or sexual orientation [ 3]. We work
with Hollaback to build technology
that enables survivors of street
harassment to share their stories.
Jill Dimond’s research suggests this
online storytelling has supported
frame transformation in the movement
as participants construct shared
understandings around the issue.
This work appeals to us as it targets
the intersection of sexism, racism,
heterosexism, and transphobia—
harassment can be directed along any of
these axes of oppression. Hollaback also
operates primarily on the individual and
cultural levels—individual, in that the
technology provides a means of recourse
for survivors and thus potential dissuasion
for would-be harassers, and cultural,
in that the movement looks to evolve a
cultural shift wherein street harassment
would become socially unacceptable.
With the Carter Center, a U. S.-
based NGO best known for its
election-observation and disease-
eradication initiatives, we developed
tools to support international
election-observation missions. A
digitized observation operation
ensures more reliable and quickly
available data, allowing anomalies to
be detected sooner.
We chose to pursue this project
because it works against a variety of
different oppressions depending on
the country holding the election. In
a country with a history of religious
discrimination, an observation
mission might pay special attention
to issues of religious oppression.
Counteracting sexism is a regular focus
of the Center’s observations. Broadly
stated, the goal of election observation
is to ensure a genuine democratic
process, and this mission is in line with
many contemporary anti-oppression
movements. Unlike Hollaback, election-
observation missions operate mainly on
Figure 1. The AORTA Collective’s “Iceberg of Oppression.”