In her book Situated knowledge: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective, Donna Haraway dove into the subject matter of objectivity in the scientific world. She observed that science in general is a field dominated by men and that the generally accepted scientific theories and methods have been used for many years. Thus, it is difficult to challenge the masculine idea of objectivity in science. Haraway argued that the masculinity concept of objectivity is not perfect and that her idea of feminism objectivity should be considered as a valid idea (Haraway, 578).
Based on her observation, the science world’s definition of objectivity encompasses the whole world as an integral part of observation. Under the exact same condition, observations made in a part of the world should match observations made in another. Haraway attacked this notion as too inflexible and rigid (Haraway, 577). Ironically, this rigid mind has made the whole process not objective and biased because of the refusal to consider other notion of objectivity. Haraway described another method to show objectivity, which she called “partial perspective” (Haraway, 584).
She argued that to show true objectivity, one must consider the local situation at the time of the observation instead of basing it on a global setting (Haraway 588). Haraway’s appeal for feminist objectivity is echoed by Karen Barad in her book Meeting the Universe Halfway. What’s important to understand is both women were not trying to replace the masculine objectivity in science with their own feminism agenda, but to use both types of objectivity in observations to obtain a truly non-biased conclusion.