Equalizing Power & Identity

The thesis starts by outlining the prevalent issues of gender inequality in India and the power dynamics associated with this. The role of feminism in addressing social constructs and subverting patriarchy is explored while analysing the difference between Western feminism and Indian feminism. This thesis compares two design approaches: one characterised as masculine, aiming for reactive user actions, and the other as feminine, encouraging reflective user actions. These terms are used as cultural signifiers, not to deepen binary constructs but to challenge their solidification as social constructs over time. The research question seeks to understand how design strategies can use these gender-associated cultural signifiers to shape user interactions, promoting reactive and reflective actions while challenging traditional gender roles in design. Additionally, the thesis draws parallels between the types of feminism, types of autonomous action and femininity/masculinity, highlighting connections between social movements for gender equality and design philosophies.
In conclusion, as a designer wanting to subvert social structures, I chose the pressing issue of gender inequality in India and the intricate power dynamics at play since they were more related to the design project. Feminism has played a vital role in deconstructing social norms and subverting the grip of patriarchy. A significant aspect of this exploration involved discerning the distinctions between Western feminism and its Indian counterpart while drawing a parallel between this and the “gendered approach to design.” Could one say Indian Feminism is more masculine?
A comparative analysis of two distinct design approaches, one characterized as masculine and geared towards evoking reactive user actions and the other as feminine, encouraging reflective user actions, was done to determine which is more effective. Not intended to reinforce binary constructs, these designations have served as valuable cultural signifiers, challenging their entrenched status as social constructs. The primary research question sought to unravel how design strategies could effectively harness these gender-associated cultural signifiers to mould user interactions, fostering reactive and reflective actions while challenging conventional gender roles in design. In the end, combining both seems the most effective, reinforcing the belief that both genders are equal.
In addition to these investigations, the soft robotic interactive bed has led to new questions regarding intention and agency while affirming the positives of a tangible experience. The idea of ritual behind the digital application proposal can further take this project to the next level by evoking reflective autonomous action in the users. It would be interesting to explore a combination of both designs.
This research underscores the significance of addressing gender inequality in both social and design contexts. It emphasizes the potential for design strategies to be agents of change, challenging established norms and promoting inclusivity and equality. Ultimately, it is a call to action, urging us to continue the ongoing battle for a more equitable and diverse world, where gender should never be a barrier but a bridge to innovative and empowering design solutions.