Seite - 16 - in Critical Issues in Science, Technology and Society Studies - Conference Proceedings of the 17th STS Conference Graz 2018

(Alicchio & Pezzoli 1988). However, not always this collaboration come to terms. On the contrary, it often ended up to divergent paths of thoughts (and initiatives), frequently due to a way of thinking the relationship between science-technology and feminism diversely implied in differently situated knowledge, mainly, though not exclusively, linked to the two positions inside/outside S-T (or expert/non expert in S-T). Was technology to be meant as an utilization/application of science or was technology part of science? Was technology a prosthetic extension (tool) or was it an instrument of scientific knowledge (applied science)? Other discussions leading to divergences were about different ways of thinking a feminist perspective – as for instance those informed by different conceptual frameworks, ranging from sexual difference thought/practice to gender difference and gender differences oriented approaches. These uneasy exchanges often brought about discussions not only resulting in theoretical- political conflicts, but sometimes causing painful separations as well. Nevertheless, I would like to underline that these disputes have concurrently significantly constructed a complex ground enabling the exchange itself: a political terrain that made effectively possible to confront positions of women inside and outside science-technology. From past to present. A strengthened gap between feminist thinking S-T from inside/ outside S-T? Although this period of feminist Italian studies and practices can be considered concluded, at least form the point of view of the prevailing political practices (relational practices or styles), during the following decades new beginnings of debates have periodically emerged. I suggest that they overall have followed the two sides of the above mentioned relational practices. From past to present, yesterday as today, in fact, not always feminist elaborations of “women in science” have met feminist reflection carried out by “women outside science”, especially, I would like to point, since the political terrain where confronting plural ways of thinking S-T and feminism from inside/outside S-T has dissolved or only impoverished. In the following years, women thinking S-T from inside S-T (or those science theoreticians working close to practicing scientists) have kept on exploring which transformations have occurred within S-T, with reference to the shift from modern to contemporary science – e. g. the emergence of 'new in-becoming science-forms', ranging from cybernetics to ecology, the impact of virtual simulation (computing) on the relationship between sciences and applied sciences (to mention to a few issues) with one main concern: at what extent these new 'in- becoming science-forms' differ from modern science? (Donini 1987, 1987a, 1990; Gagliasso 1986, 1987, 1987a; Associazione Donne e Scienza 2004; Gagliasso & Zucco 2007; Gagliasso 2008). However, later in the years, some of the crucial questions which were previously challenging from a feminist perspective – as for instance, how to relate these transformations to the permanence or dissolution of androcentric nucleus in science/sciences? (Donini 1987, 1987a, 1990; Gagliasso 1986, 1987, 1987a) faded away, maybe proportionally to the loss of political terrain that help producing this questioning. Women reflecting on S-T from outside S-T, especially since the half of the 1990s, have been more involved in Donna Haraway's argumentation (the Cyborg Manifesto was translated in Italian in 1995), acknowledged not much as a prominent approach aimed at specifically interrogating S-T transformations at present, but as a significant feminist theory interpreting subjectivity in 16