Cyberpunk, the Postglobal and the Posthuman

I remember in Pre-k when we had to do a presentation about our chosen bird. It didn’t take long for me to decide that I wanted to do my presentation on hummingbirds. As a child, I was under the impression that they must have loved to sing and hum, given their name, and that was something that resonated with me. Even though it wasn’t the objective of the project, I knew from a young age if I could get to be any animal I would be a hummingbird. To this day that remains true.

The Flying Jewels Or Should I Say Jules?

Humming birds happen to be the smallest of migratory birds, known for their impressive wing fluttering and polychromatic color scheme. Humming birds are often referred to as the flying jewels of the world due to their vibrant plumage that tends to sparkle like gems when refracting light. But a beautiful appearance is not the only thing the humming bird has to offer. Hummingbirds are some of the most efficient pollinators in the world, meaning if they were to be removed from their habitat, it would suffer immensely. Although they can be quite small in size, weighing less than a nickel, their might is not to be questioned. However, even beyond their physical capabilities, hummingbirds mean so much symbolically, representing joy, energy, and resilience. It is believed that they can represent positive transformation, overcoming obstacles, romance, and even be spiritual signs from those you love that have passed away.

It’s A Bird… It’s A Plane… It’s A Girl With Feathers…?

When I think about how far I would go with merging with a hummingbird, I feel like there are two ways it could go. On one hand I could see a more simple modification, like the addition of bionic wings that fuse to nerve endings in the spinal cord or something. I think that would be the least complex merge, still maintaining the physical human body simply with enhancements. On the other hand, I could also see the development of technology that turns you into your animal of choice, maybe through a serum, but ultimately the anatomical structure of the human body would be transformed into that of a hummingbird, in my case. However, even though the body would change, I would still maintain my own consciousness and spirit. Furthermore there could be a counter serum that could change one back into their human form.

With that said, I don’t think either option would truly hinder one’s humanity. Granted, I find humanity to be defined beyond the body and more so within someone’s morality, consciousness, and soul. I don’t think that technological advancements or enhancements would inherently remove or damage someone’s humanness. But, everyone is different and it is easy for some to get lost in constantly enhancing themselves until they lose who they are. That stands true even in our own society. So while I don’t think humanity would be lost, I do believe that there is something to gain from merging with the hummingbird, whether it be with option one or two. Either way I would be able to fly, which now that I think about it, I probably wouldn’t fly that much because I’m afraid of heights. But I guess that poses the question of whether or not merging with the hummingbird would erase my fear and replace it with the bird’s natural instinct to fly. I think this particular aspect reminds me most of Haraway’s cyborg manifesto in which she champions the hybrid organism that is a blend of physical traits but the culture or mannerisms of two organisms.

Eeeny Meeny Miny Moe

In a perfect world, everyone would have equal access to the proposed technology that would allow one to merge with their favorite animal. But if taking into consideration both the real world and the dynamics present within most cyberpunk works, it is not far-fetched to say that the technology would be monopolized. It would be yet another example of high tech-low life, in which mega corporations and large wealthy families would abuse resources to produce the technology as they see fit, and distribute said technology to whom they see fit. It is possible that this could produce an unfair power dynamic between regular humans and those who are hybridized. On one end, those who have access to merging with animals could come to make up the upper class of society being afforded immense privileges while non-hybridized human beings make up the lower working class. On the other end the situation could be flipped, those in power might see an opportunity in merging human beings with animals, focusing only on the heightened abilities it might produce. They could then decide to hybridize people against their will in order to make up an enhanced work force. Ultimately the working class could end up being subjected to extremely harsh conditions that divide them from the rest of humanity. Both of which are narratives that happen often in cyberpunk genres.

All of that makes me question whether or not something like this should be possible. Granted I’m not sure if we would ever be able to develop the extensive technology necessary to merge human beings with animals, but even if we could it doesn’t necessarily mean that we should. If such a feat would not be easily accessible to everyone and would incite more violence, division, and recklessness within society, I don’t think that the possibility would be worth it. Sigh… I guess that means I won’t be a hummingbird any time soon.

*AI was not used in any way to generate this post. This includes structure, format, ideas, and source research.

References:

Smithsonian (2018). Hummingbirds. Smithsonian’s National Zoo. https://nationalzoo.si.edu/migratory-birds/hummingbirds

Haraway, D. (1985) A cyborg manifesto. Science, Technology, and Socialist- Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century. Socialist Review https://www.sfu.ca/~decaste/OISE/page2/files/HarawayCyborg.pdf

Rethinking Intelligence: Why Pigs?

After researching “Smartest Animals,” I came across one that I did not expect: pigs. As I continued to read, I found that, apart from the slaughter farms that we are used to seeing them in, they are quite intelligent. So, when asked what animal that I would hybridize with, I would choose a pig. I feel that they are misunderstood due to the environment that they are often placed in, which I identify heavily with since I am Black and a woman.

Now, if I could hybridize with a pig, I would stop at cognitive adaptations because the lifestyle that they have to live is not great. They are placed in crowded, unclean conditions so they can be used for our own pleasure. They aren’t given the opportunity to reach their full potential because their place in life has already been determined. Regarding their cognitive state, they have great memory, are socially and emotionally aware, and have intelligence that outranks some animals that we consider to be the smartest. Even though I have these traits as a person, it interests me that pigs have all these traits as well and no one ever talks about them. They are only known for being stupid, lazy, and unclean, but none of these things are true. I think this is why I identify with them so much, because when the world stereotypes me as a Black woman, it is never to show my full potential, only to degrade me and put me in a box.

Humanity, Identity, and the Limits of Hybridization

I also would only go as far as cognitive hybridization because I think any further combining would leave me with less humanity. As I would change physically and behaviorally, other people would stop seeing me as a human. While I believe every living thing has purpose and is important, to be viewed as human there are certain traits I must maintain, like a resemblance to humans physically and behaviorally. I think humanity is heavily related to the way we think, reason, feel, and look. If I become too much like a pig, I would lose a lot of these traits that connect me to humanity.

When considering a technology like this, I see the greatest connection to Donna Haraway’s idea of the cyborg. The cyborg breaks the binary boundaries that are set by society by being part human and part machine. It takes the hierarchical nature of the binaries away because it is not choosing to be one or the other; it is both and neither—it is something brand new. The binary between humans and animals places humans higher on the hierarchical scale. With a technology like this, it allows for humans to merge with animals, thus breaking that binary. While this could be a good thing, there could be a host of issues that occur due to its implementation.

Inequality and Ethical Questions of Hybrid Technology

While I think everyone should have access to this technology, realistically, it will only be available to the wealthy given the cost of something like this. People who are poor may be stuck like those in Neuromancer who began to get unsafe operations to upgrade in order to survive. Since people will begin to use this technology to possibly get the speed of a cheetah or the strength of a gorilla, those who cannot afford the best will have to do their best to keep up. Those who were able to afford the better operation will likely develop some sort of superiority over those who could not, which can create a similar division to that of the wealthy and the poor now. This thought experiment forced me to see many things that I had not considered. Introducing a technology like this could be helpful and initiate great scientific innovations. However, like all other things, there will be good and bad, as well as many ethical, legal, and moral questions raised. How would our rights change? Who would benefit from the new systems created? I think these questions, and many others, should be considered if this type of technology was developed.

AI Attestation: AI was used to edit the grammar of the final draft and create headings.

What Animal Hybridization Might Reveal About Being Human

The Thought Experiment: Becoming Part Animal

Imagine a future where technology allows humans to safely and reversibly incorporate traits from animals. Not cosmetic changes, but functional ones—enhanced senses, physical abilities, or cognitive shifts borrowed from other species. In this thought experiment, I would choose to hybridize with an eagle. Eagles possess one of the most remarkable biological capabilities in the animal kingdom: extraordinary vision. According to the U.S. National Library of Medicine, eagles can see about four to five times farther than humans and detect small movements from miles away (National Library of Medicine, 2022). Incorporating eagle-like visual perception into a human body would dramatically expand how we interact with the world. Imagine recognizing subtle environmental patterns, seeing distant landscapes with clarity, or detecting danger long before it reaches you. However, my hybridization would be limited to minor physical and neurological adaptations, not a complete transformation. I would not want wings, feathers, or a radically altered body. Instead, I would choose enhancements such as improved retinal structure, expanded visual processing in the brain, and perhaps faster visual reflexes. These modifications would maintain my human identity while expanding my sensory abilities. This raises an important question: how much change can occur before someone stops being human?

Humanity and the Question of Identity

Cyberpunk works often challenge the idea that humanity is tied strictly to biology. In Ghost in the Shell, Major Motoko Kusanagi’s body is almost entirely artificial, yet her consciousness, her “ghost,” raises the question of whether identity resides in the body or the mind. Similarly, Blade Runner forces audiences to confront whether replicants, who possess memories and emotions, should be considered human despite their artificial origins. Donna Haraway’s “cyborg” concept pushes this even further. In A Cyborg Manifesto, Haraway argues that modern humans already exist as hybrids of organism and machine. Technologies like smartphones, medical implants, and AI systems blur the boundaries between natural and artificial life. If that is the case, then animal hybridization would simply be another extension of boundary-breaking technologies. The human body has never been static. Vaccines, prosthetics, and gene editing already modify biological limitations. Adding eagle-like vision may not erase humanity but instead expand what it means to be human. For me, humanity is defined less by physical form and more by consciousness, empathy, and moral responsibility. As long as those elements remain intact, biological enhancements should not erase human identity.

The Inequality Problem

While the idea of hybridization might seem exciting, access to such technology would almost certainly be unequal. Throughout history, advanced technologies, from healthcare to genetic therapies, have often been accessible first to wealthy populations. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have warned that human enhancement technologies such as gene editing could widen social inequality if only certain groups can afford them (National Academies, 2017). If animal hybridization followed a similar path, society could divide into two classes: enhanced and non-enhanced humans. Those with enhancements might gain advantages in education, athletics, military service, or surveillance roles. For example, individuals with eagle-like vision could excel in fields requiring long-distance observation or rapid environmental analysis. Meanwhile, people without enhancements might face new forms of discrimination or reduced opportunities. Cyberpunk stories often imagine exactly this scenario. In many cyberpunk worlds, corporate elites control enhancement technologies while ordinary people struggle to keep up. Hybridization could reproduce those same inequalities in reality if ethical safeguards were not implemented.

The Future of Hybrid Humanity

Animal hybridization challenges our assumptions about identity, capability, and fairness. While borrowing traits from species like eagles could expand human perception and potential, it also raises deeper questions about who gets to evolve. Ultimately, the question is not simply whether we can enhance ourselves, but how we choose to do it and who benefits. As Haraway suggests, the boundaries between human, machine, and animal are already dissolving. The real challenge is ensuring that these transformations do not deepen social divides or erode the values that make humanity meaningful. If hybridization ever becomes possible, the most important decision may not be which animal traits we adopt—but how we ensure those changes remain aligned with empathy, equity, and shared responsibility.

AI Attestation: AI tools were used in the early drafting process of this blog post to assist with organizing ideas and improving clarity of writing. All analysis, argument development, and final editing were completed by the author.

References

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Human genome editing: Science, ethics, and governance. National Academies Press. National Library of Medicine. (2022). Vision in birds of prey. https://www.nlm.nih.gov

Haraway's Cyborg Theory and the Breakdown of Binaries

Donna Haraway’s theory and idea of the cyborg stem from her feminist and socialist theoretical work. She asserts that cyborgs, in themselves, break the binary boundaries that Western thought has placed on us. Boundaries such as human vs. machine and nature vs. culture assert that there is one category that triumphs over the other and serves as the standard. The cyborg’s existence breaks down these boundaries by design. It does not adhere to the standards and does not have allegiance to a specific side of the binary, which Haraway asserts provides liberation and freedom due to its hybridizing of the binary.

In Janelle Monáe’s The ArchAndroid, we follow her character, who lives in a world where androids are solely for their utility to humans. They are used for entertainment and are treated as inferior to humans. She falls in love with a human, which is a crime in this universe. This would normally result in punishment, but she escapes and becomes a figure of revolution and liberation for other androids. Monáe’s storyline incorporates cyberpunk themes with Afrofuturistic visuals, sounds, and themes to build a world where her main character is an example of the very cyborg Haraway discusses.

The Metaverse as a Modern Cyborg Space

Today, there are many examples of the cyborg and the principles that Haraway discusses, given that digital identity comes in many forms. Most prominently, the Metaverse and the way the virtual world it creates shows the cyborg identity in action. Since it is pushed forth by a corporation, it also reflects common cyberpunk themes while interacting with the ideas that Haraway and Monáe push forth.

The Metaverse is “a simulated environment that is developed to converge an enhanced version of physical and virtual realities” (Dwivedi, 2023). Through the metaverse, users are immersed in the virtual platform and are represented by characters or avatars that they can create however they would like. While you may be one person, you are able to be different from your physical form and separate yourself from it. This creates multiple identities for the user: the identity associated with their physical form and their identity in the metaverse. This also is used to blur many binaries that Haraway discusses, such as the human and machine, the physical and virtual, and the gender binary. Through dissolving these dualisms, this form of the cyborg reflects Haraway’s ideas. When considering the metaverse and its avatars, there can be a liberatory factor in being able to exist as a new version of yourself that is separate from the experience associated with your physical form. While this is not the same situation discussed in the album, there is a relation to the freedom experienced by breaking free from what the real world wants for you.

Future Possibilities and Risks of the Metaverse

Looking forward, the Metaverse could go many ways. Considering current trends and technologies being developed, such as Neuralink, I could see wearable technology and brain-computer connections that allow instant access to the metaverse becoming normal. This could be positive because of the freedom it would give users to escape into their virtual reality. While there could be positives, in the article “Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse,” the possible negative effects seem more likely. The vulnerability of the consumer, privacy concerns, and identity theft are all raised as significant concerns in the future of the metaverse. This goes against the freedom of breaking the binary because it challenges the safety and life of the physical body that users inhabit.

The cyborg is not a speculative science fiction concept or character. It is present in the present and exists in the digital identities we have access to create. Given the boundaries that are blurred by the concept of the cyborg, we now must question who controls how blurred those boundaries are. Especially when considering the metaverse, the corporations behind it take away some of the freedom we receive from their products. Hopefully, the technologies we continue to develop are able to give us access to a hybrid future that affirms our current identities and encourages us to find freedom in new ones.

AI attestation: AI was used to edit grammar and create heading titles. https://chatgpt.com/share/699a856d-b6ec-800d-b3fe-756b565ea4f2

References Dwivedi, Y. K., Kshetri, N., Hughes, L., Rana, N. P., Baabdullah, A. M., Kar, A. K., ... & Yan, M. (2023). Exploring the darkverse: A multi-perspective analysis of the negative societal impacts of the metaverse. Information systems frontiers, 25(5), 2071-2114.

The natural way of the world is for organisms to evolve, with human beings being a prime example. We’ve managed to morph from individuals with limited speech and lithics to individuals with advanced thought processes and understanding of extreme technology. It’s no wonder that as time continues so does technological advancement and its integration into everyday life. However, I wonder if such is the reason that we as a society are beginning to become desensitized to the overconsumption and integration of AI. It’s no longer being used as an intellectual tool, but as a creator of art. And no, I’m not just talking about the production of little avatars for a profile picture.

As of late, there have been more instances in which people are using AI to generate music and personas for fictional musicians and advertising the music as their own creation to audiences. A popular example of this issue is Xania Monet. The creator of the artificial musician, recently explained that the AI persona is her means of expressing her creativity and sharing her story. I don’t mean to be close minded, but I think one of the most beautiful things about humanity is the way the mind and spirit works to produce emotion through fine arts, dancing, and music. These creations are then shared between cultures, ultimately strengthening the bond between peoples. I can’t help but feel as though the use of AI takes away from that beauty as the act lacks the need for creativity. Not to mention, AI is not producing the voice of these AI artists from thin air. The programs are utilizing the voices of human singers and merging them together to produce one voice.

In my opinion, the existence and use of AI singers connects directly to Haraway’s concept of the cyborg. We’re witnessing a direct blur between humanity and technology in the form of art, and more and more it’s becoming harder to separate humanness from the inanimate nature of technology. For instance, if one puts lyrics into a program and simply asks the program to produce a voice, is it still that artist? Or what if one simply asks an algorithm to create both lyrics and a voice based on a prompt, is it fair to say that the art produced belongs to the human or does it belong to the AI? Even more so, would it even be art if it substantially lacks the influence of a human being.? I think about this often.

Once again I don’t want to be closed minded but I can’t say that it isn’t concerning and overwhelming to see just how much AI is becoming integrated into our norms. In this specific case, it makes me wonder what music will look like in the future. There are people, who work their whole lives to be noticed for their music, taking the time to train their voice and hone their craft and yet they never have the privilege of seeing their dream come to light. And now, you have artificial musicians being produced and receiving record deals as if they aren’t inanimate objects. Will that be the future? A future where those who live and breathe music are no longer fortunate enough to produce it, to be recognized for it. I feel as though AI is the easy way out for so many people. They use artificial intelligence as a crutch, refusing to do the work for themselves and to pour their essence into the things they love, instead relying on an algorithm. There just seems to be a lack of genuineness.

So far, there has been some legislation being drafted in order to monitor and decrease the abuse of AI in music. The law mostly focuses on the AI regeneration of music that resembles the music of artists. So in retrospect, there will definitely be those who oppose the usage of AI in music, but I fear that wouldn’t be enough. There are a plethora of consequences of AI that threaten more than just the authenticity and creativity of music, but the actual livelihoods of marginalized individuals. Even with such consequences being shared, there is still continued development of AI programs and data centers. So I guess only time will tell. But for now, we’re in a place far from what we’re used to. Far from home.

*AI was not used in any way to generate this post. This includes formatting, the organization of ideas, as well as the gathering of sources.

Citations:

Hight, J. (2024). AI music isn’t going away. Here are 4 big questions about what’s next. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/25/1246928162/generative-ai-music-law-technology

Voynovskaya, N. (2025). AI Is Coming for the Music Industry. How Will Artists Adapt? Kqed.org. https://www.kqed.org/arts/13982572/ai-is-coming-for-the-music-industry-how-will-artists-adapt

Intro

In Donna Haraway’s “A Cyborg Manifesto,” she introduces the concept of the cyborg as a boundary breaking figure that is half organism and half machine, and whose very existence disrupts the story that identity is fixed, black or white, one thing or another. The cyborg is many different things simultaneously which breaks those rigid boundaries. The cyborg is powerful because it possesses a lot of conflicts, such as human versus machine, physical body versus information, nature versus culture, ect.. Rather than grounding identity in biology or origin , Haraway argues that identities are constructed, fluid, and constantly changing and evolving. Haraway’s vision closely aligns with the contemporary experiences of gender fluidity/ nonbinary identity in digital spaces, where individuals are pushing the notion that gender is flexible and is situational rather than being fixed. This real world example while reflecting Haraway’s vision can also be tied to Janelle Monáe’s fundamentals of liberation being mediated through corporate platforms and lived as an everyday negotiation rather than a singular revolution, as shown in the ArchAndroid.

Gender Fluidity Online

Digital spaces have become cornerstones for gender discovery, experimentation, and expression. They also offer community because they allow people to encounter information as well as share and receive experiences that would not be possible without the use of technology. In the article Gender Fluidity: The ever shifting shape of identity Carlo Hernandp’s self understanding developed through access to media they consumed during Covid-19, which led them feeling “completely different” without discovering terms like “nonbinary” and “gender fluid” that finally resonated (Admin, 2022, pg. 1). The article emphasizes that the phenomenon is not necessarily new, but rather the availability of language and reflection is. Lisa Diamond points out that what has changed is “a new vocabulary available,” and she highlights the internet’s unprecedented capacity to reflect people’s experiences back to them “instantly and with no financial cost,” even across global distance (Admin,2022 pg.1). In other words, digital space doesn’t merely host gender fluidity, it helps make it thinkable and shareable. These dynamics map cleanly onto how gender is lived online today. Some prime platforms being utilized in order to build this community are Tiktok, Discord, Instagram, and even video game avatars. Similarly to the previous article, in OPINION: Nonbinary people don’t owe anyone androgyny, the author insists that gender expression can shift on a day to day basis which should be allowed to be explored without harsh parameters being set. The author uses language to describe gender as “playful” and the jurisdiction surrounding it as bedding to be “softer”( OPINION: Nonbinary People Don’t Owe Anyone Androgony, 2025, pg.1) Boundaries Being Challenged Digital communities make visible what a lot of gender fluid or nonbinary struggle to express. The concept that gender does not always fit into the two categories of male and female. (Admin,2022 pg.1) frames gender fluidity as a concept for those who don’t feel as if they fall into the stereotypical categories and helps them “move away from” feeling like they need a singular label. The article, OPINION: Nonbinary People Don’t Owe Anyone Androgony reinforces the construct of nonbinary identity existing for those who are outside of the typical binary and do not wish to conform. When the traditional structure of male and female begins to change, the power that it holds in society weakens. Liberation can begin when people are no longer confined to an individual box and can expand and become an undiscovered version of themselves. The boundary of fixed gender collapsing relocates authority over gender from institutions and assumptions to the person of their chosen communities. In both articles, liberation is not an abstract ideal but rather it is experienced as safer relationships, stronger boundaries, and the ability to be recognized on one’s own terms.

Haraway’s Cyborg Haraway’s cyborg is a political myth for the late twentieth century that remains deeply relevant: the cyborg reveals that the self is assembled through systems (biological, technological, cultural) and that this hybridity can be a site of resistance. Digital nonbinary identity is “cyborg” not because nonbinary people are machines, but because online gender is literally mediated through techno-social systems: interfaces, pronoun fields, profile options, avatars, algorithmic visibility, and networked communities. Haraway’s rejection of essentialism is mirrored in both articles’ insistence that gender is flexible and context-sensitive. Gender fluidity is described as a one-day-at-a-time navigation rather than commitment to a single “overarching” label (Admin,2022 pg.1). In OPINION: Nonbinary People Don’t Owe Anyone Androgony , the nonbinary subject refuses the obligation to be legible to others through stereotyped androgyny; identity expands beyond what the dominant gaze expects. Haraway imagines boundary collapse as politically promising, but contemporary digital life shows boundary collapse can be profitable and policed at the same time.

Monáe’s The Arch Android Monáe’s The ArchAndroid uses the android as a metaphor for marginalization and revolt. Cindi Mayweather is criminalized not merely for actions but for what her existence symbolizes: the collapse of boundaries that uphold social order. Similarly, nonbinary and genderfluid people often become targets of policing because they disrupt the binary system many institutions depend on. Article 1 includes a striking example of institutional friction: medical intake forms requiring “male or female” produce anxiety and signal that systems may not understand what a genderfluid person needs (Admin,2022 pg.1). This echoes Monáe’s world, where bureaucratic systems classify and control bodies and identities. Meanwhile, Article 2’s emphasis on stereotypes and the demand to “look” nonbinary enough speaks to a different kind of policing: cultural surveillance, where people enforce norms through assumptions and misrecognition ( OPINION: Nonbinary People Don’t Owe Anyone Androgony, 2025, pg.1). In Monáe’s narrative, android identity is misread as threat; in contemporary life, nonbinary identity is often misread as inauthentic unless it matches a narrow image. Monáe’s vision spotlights collective uprising while the real world often delivers liberation through micro-resistances and boundary setting. Which is powerful, but less cinematic.

Prediction In the future I heavily believe that the construct of gender will be all but eradicated. Everyone will be free with no label unless that person specifically wants it. From 2020 to 2026 we have seen a dramatic increase in the use/ asking for other pronouns. That is just the beginning of this phenomenon which I believe could even potentially morph into the medical realm into the future. My inference is that in 30 years birth certificates and legal documents will leave a blank open that the individual can go back and self identify themselves later in life. In 20–30 years, identity may become more “cyborg” in literal interface terms: mixed-reality avatars, voice modulation tools, adaptive pronoun systems, and customizable social profiles across physical and digital spaces. Gender expression could become increasingly modular chosen not once but continuously, depending on community, setting, and personal feeling. Conclusion Gender fluidity and nonbinary identity in digital spaces show how Haraway’s cyborg theory is playing out in everyday life. Online communities challenge boundaries that once seemed natural, such as male versus female, biology versus social identity, and fixed identity versus change. The two articles highlight that gender fluidity is experienced as something that shifts over time and across situations, made possible by online access to language, representation, and community. They also show that true liberation for nonbinary people requires rejecting stereotypes that limit them to one specific appearance or way of expressing gender. This collapse of boundaries is liberating because it gives individuals and their communities more control over how gender is defined and understood. It allows people to set clearer personal boundaries, form safer relationships, and develop identities that can grow rather than conform to rigid norms. At the same time, this reality differs from Haraway’s and Monáe’s visions because online liberation is shaped by digital platforms that can profit from identity and create new forms of monitoring and judgment. Instead of a dramatic revolution, liberation often appears as everyd ay acts of resistance and self-assertion. Still, if future generations continue to normalize flexible and self-defined gender, new forms of freedom may emerge, along with new struggles over visibility, control, and the right to change.

Sources admin. (2022, September 15). 'Gender fluidity': The ever-shifting shape of identity. Yerepouni Daily News. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a66CY-2XG1-F11P-X477-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

(2025, September 30). OPINION: Nonbinary people don't owe anyone androgyny. The Technician: North Carolina State University. https://advance.lexis.com/api/document?collection=news&id=urn%3acontentItem%3a6GW2-B5D3-SHDN-22NF-00000-00&context=1519360&identityprofileid=NZ9N7751352

Do You Take This AI To Be Your Lawfully Wedded Partner?

In a world where you see fluid identities and liberation through hybridity playing out today is AI and human relationship using ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity and any other AI sources. Whether it is explaining your thoughts or even health concerns, a shift is seen in building a relationship with AI.

What boundaries are being challenged?

Humans are now statically relying on AI to the point a person's character is altered. In a state of not having "originality", AI creates a realm for humans to escape from. In addition, the connection made with AI creates an emotional level humans confide in, grieve with and in many cases flirt with, However, while AI has capabilities to much human emotions, making a distinction between "does AI actually have feelings" or even "can AI resonate to a human's feelings" is the center of questioning.

The main challenge is between the human and essentially the machine generating a response. While AI can create a world of comfort with fast replies, creating images, AI produces a real emotional experience for the human. The human error is now that intimacy is no longer dependent on a human when AI opens its door to many possibilities at an easier access. The issue in state is now that AI is able to store information, memories and vulnerability where authenticity is now in question. Using AI as a diary to confide in, AI is able to project a response in what the human wants to hear.

In reference to Donna Haraway's cyborg theory, this crisis ties immensely together. Haraway's theory suggests that the distinction between the human and machine supersedes a natural connection that once was needed. The ability to confide into a machine creates an emotional attachment and intimacy becomes rather accessible than creating a biological connection.

The ArchAndroid by Janelle Monae, resonates deeply with this criteria, however Monae herself falls in love with a human itself. While the fear of creating this connection is governed by the Android, Monae crosses that boundary to pursue her desires. In reference to today's society, humans are now too crossing the boundaries and unable to the downside of creating this relationship with a machine. Normalizing this emotional bond with AI creates a pattern of willingness to cross the boundary themselves by accessing emotional attachme

Fast forwarding to twenty to thirty years, the human-AI relationship will continue to grow stronger, however the sense of losing its identity will decrease. Having this connection with AI will no longer need humans to leave their comfort zones nor make decisions themselves. The upcoming future will be dangerous, unsettling and unknown whether or not the person you are speaking to is capable of generating their own thoughts without the help of AI. But most importantly, the world's population may also decline when AI is capable of generating human-like feelings, the need to seek relationships will decline. While AI is not capable of reproducing, AI will still be readily available for the next conversation and eager to know more.

Reference

Opinion | we’re all in a throuple with A.I. - The New York Times. (n.d.-d). https://archive.ph/2026.02.15-075149/https:/www.nytimes.com/2026/02/13/opinion/ai-relationships.html

https://chatgpt.com/share/699a6b97-6178-8003-89ad-b48de7c0f957

ChatGPT was used to create AI images

Solomon Ray, an AI generated music artist, started gaining a lot of attention and surprised his listeners that he was not human. According to Christianity Today (2025), Ray’s music has started a debate on being authentic, creative, and whether something that was created by code can have “soul” (Mcginnis, 2025). A news report from WLBT3 talks about how the artist was made using artificial intelligence tools, which really blurs the line between human producer and machine performer. Solomon Ray’s success challenges what it means to be an artist. WIth more artists like Ray, challenges and collapses the boundary between human and machine creativity, which also relates to the cyborg theory by Donna Haraway and the idea of the ArchAndroid by Janelle Monáe.

Can Creativity Exist Without a Human?

The boundary that Solomon Ray challenges is the idea that creativity has to come from a human. Art is normally tied to lived experiences, emotion, past trauma, and physical presence. An artist has been assumed to be someone that their identity and expression is connected to themselves. AI generated musicians challenge and make this assumption complicated. Solomon Ray’s music is made through different algorithms that have been trained using human data (Cole, 2025) This makes the creative process a collaboration between human input and machine thinking and computation. There is no longer a traditional separation between artist and computer. Technology is not just assisting the artist, but taking over and is becoming the artist itself. This makes listeners and its audience think about whether authenticity is about origin or impact. This is a public argument that have people thinking whether AI generated music can have “soul” (Mcginnis, 2025)

Haraway in the Real World

This connects to Donna Haraway’s idea of a cyborg, which is about breaking down the strict line between human and machine. Haraway mentions that these boundaries are not as fixed and set as we commonly assume they are. The cyborg is a hybrid between human and technology which challenges the idea that an identity has to fit into one category. Solomon Ray is an example of being a hybrid and not fitting into just one category. He is not human, but not just a tool. HIs music is a product of human programming and machine generation. He represents an identity that does not fit into traditional definitions of artist or creator. Solomon Ray helps Haraway’s argument and blurs the boundary which helps make new ways of defining who or what gets to create and make art.

From ArchAndroid to the Algorithm

Solomon Ray also connects to Janelle Monáe’s The ArchAndroid, where Cindi Mayweather is an android who challenges what it means to be a human. In the album, Cindi is not trying to be a human, but expanding the definition of human. She is questioning why the definition is narrow. Monáe uses the android to show that identity is not something you are born into, but is something that is flexible and can be redefined. Solomon Ray is similar in terms of he is an artist without a human body. The difference between the two is that Cindi has consciousness and emotion while Solomon was created and controlled by a programmer. Both Cindi and Solomon challenge the idea that identity and creativity have to be tied to biology.

The Future of Hybrid Identity

Looking ahead about 20 to 30 years, AI artists will become more common and accepted. As AI gets better and more advanced, there will probably be more AI artists. Solomon Ray already produces and sings his own music (Cole, 2025), but eventually there will be performances. Although the technology is already out there, the next thing will most likely be music videos and potentially even fully AI concerts. Live performances with lights and production with him walking and moving around a stage maybe as a hologram. Although Solomon Ray was not the first AI artist, he was number one on music charts. Eventually, people will start making their own music using AI to cater to their specific music genres and lyrics. Solomon Ray has opened the door for more creative expression allowing new types of music and artists to come through.

AI Attestation: AI was used to help plan and edit this post. I asked for the prompt to be simplified, to help me edit, APA formatting, coming up with a title, and headers. https://chatgpt.com/share/699a5f9a-1a54-800d-a937-ed9076d8cec7

McGinnis, K. (2025, November 21). Solomon Ray: The AI Christian music artist raising questions about soul and authenticity. Christianity Today. https://www.christianitytoday.com/2025/11/solomon-ray-ai-christian-music-soul-singer/
Cole, C. (2025, December 4). Influencer behind Mississippi-made AI artist. WLBT. https://www.wlbt.com/2025/12/04/influencer-behind-mississippi-made-ai-artist/

When Donna Haraway describes the cyborg, she is not predicting a chrome-plated robot future. She is pointing out something more unsettling and more empowering: the human body has never been sealed off from technology. We are hybrid beings already. The question is whether that hybridity expands our freedom or narrows it. One contemporary example where hybridity is playing out as liberation is the rise of biohacking and wearable self-tracking culture. From NFC chips implanted in hands to smart rings that monitor sleep and heart rate, people are voluntarily merging with technology in order to extend their capabilities. This is not science fiction. It is happening in gyms, tech communities, medical labs, and even everyday households.

Extending the Body Through Feedback

At the heart of cyborg theory is the idea of a feedback loop. A feedback loop is a system where biological processes and machines communicate continuously. Today’s wearable devices already function this way. For example, smartwatches monitor heart rate and adjust exercise recommendations. Continuous glucose monitors help users regulate diet in real time. Adaptive deep brain stimulation systems for Parkinson’s adjust electrical signals based on neural activity. These systems don’t just “assist” the body. They become part of how the body regulates itself. Technology participates in homeostasis. That shift reflects Haraway’s insight that the line between organism and machine is less solid than we imagine. Instead of replacing humanity, these devices reconfigure what human capability looks like. A runner using biometric data to optimize performance, a diabetic using real-time glucose tracking to maintain stability, or a person using neural interfaces to restore movement these are not diminished humans. They are augmented ones.

Liberation Through Access and Enhancement

Hybridity becomes liberating when it increases agency. For many disabled communities, assistive technologies have already transformed quality of life. But the newer wave of biohacking moves beyond medical necessity into elective enhancement.

Individuals implant NFC chips to unlock doors with their hands. Others use subdermal magnets to sense electromagnetic fields. Wearables provide insight into sleep cycles, stress patterns, and metabolic responses. What’s significant here is not the gadget, it’s the mindset. The body is treated as adaptable, upgradeable, open to redesign. That perspective challenges the idea that the “natural body” is fixed or complete. Janelle Monáe’s android persona in The ArchAndroid reimagines technological embodiment not as loss of humanity but as expanded identity. In real life, biohackers often describe implants and devices as ways of becoming “more fully themselves,” not less. Technology becomes a creative medium for the self.

Where This Reflects and Complicates Haraway

Haraway calls cyborgs “illegitimate offspring” of militarism and capitalism. That warning still matters. Many wearable devices collect data for corporate ecosystems. Health tracking can slide into surveillance. Insurance companies are already experimenting with incentive-based biometric monitoring. So the same feedback loops that empower users can also discipline them. The difference lies in control. When individuals choose technologies to expand capacity, hybridity becomes self-authored. When institutions mandate monitoring, hybridity becomes regulatory. Right now, we are in the middle of that tension.

What Might This Look Like in 20–30 Years?

If current trends continue, the next generation of cyborg life could include:

1. Seamless Bio-Digital Integration Wearables may become implantables. Health metrics could be continuously optimized by AI systems that learn individual patterns over decades. Instead of checking your stats, your body will quietly self-adjust.

2. Personalized Neural Interfaces Non-invasive brain-computer interfaces are already improving. In a generation, mental commands might control devices as easily as touchscreens do now. This would not replace physical interaction but extend it.

3. Community-Based Biohacking As open-source hardware grows, communities may build and modify their own enhancement systems. Instead of relying solely on corporate tech, grassroots innovation could reshape access and affordability.

4. Redefined Ideas of “Normal” If augmentation becomes widespread, baseline expectations of human capability may shift. Enhanced memory recall, improved metabolic regulation, or optimized cognitive focus could become ordinary rather than exceptional.

The important shift is psychological. Hybridity is no longer framed solely as medical repair or dystopian takeover. It is increasingly framed as customization, optimization, and creative redesign. We are not witnessing the collapse of humanity into machinery. We are witnessing a transformation in how people understand embodiment. The body is no longer seen as a closed system but as an evolving interface. Haraway’s cyborg was always about possibility. Today, that possibility is no longer theoretical. It is wearable, implantable, and increasingly personal. In the hands of those who choose it, hybridity can be a form of freedom.

AI statement- Generative AI was used to give me topic ideas for the blog post and was not used furthermore after that.

The Diaspora is the Modern Day Cyborg

It sounds ridiculous.

The term "diaspora" implies history, migration, and displacement (Bamberger et. al 2021). "Cyborg," in the most stereotypical sense, often brings up concepts of prosthetic limbs, a demolished environment, and the technological landmarks of cyberpunk (Haddow 2021).

But if you break down these two ideas, and strip away the associations that stitch themselves to diaspora and cyborg, it becomes clear that both terms describe the same exact phenomenon.

Who could possibly embody the cyborg concept of defying categories better than someone who never felt comfortable in one? Who could possibly understand hybridity more than someone from many places, speaking many languages, and embracing many histories, but unable to truly be claimed by any?

Living In-Between

Diasporic identity is essentially a messy fusion of cultural, linguistic, political, and historical systems (Zhao 2024). There are hundreds of fragments that you must carefully keep together to create a coherent self.

Just as Haraway's cyborg opposed the concept of purity, kids growing up in the diaspora must understand at a young age that they are composed of too much Other to ever be as purely ethnic as their counterparts. Too Asian to be American, for example, or too American to be Asian.

Over time, this hybridity of identities blended into a point of pride. Tiktoks reclaiming ancestral languages, for example, led to people creating music aimed at showcasing their unique blend of mother tongues. Jokes by people from the diaspora about their own experiences spurred a sense of community that was irrelevant to borders or race. In the same way that Cindy Mayweather from The ArchAndroid refuses to be categorized as human or machine, those living in the diaspora do the same: they refuse to pick between identities.

The Dictation of Space

Who decides what "real" culture is? Who has the authority to police identity? What counts as fluent enough? How do you learn your history when history books were dipped in White ink?

Often, we are taught to respect the boundaries of race and identity without question. Accept tradition blindly, and if you are less than a certain percentage of a race, do not claim to be it.

Gen-Z has pushed against this, choosing instead to engineer their self-images. People are building selves that are fluid, adaptive, and contrary to the binaries imposed on gender, boundary lines, and census boxes.

Case, the protagonist in Neuromancer, describes a world where identity is distributed and updated constantly. Reality is the same way; as people grow, their identities shift. Someone can learn more about a culture they've lost touch with, updating their identity through their own hard work and determination.

References

Bamberger et al. (2021). Diaspora, internationalization and higher education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 69(5), 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2021.1966282.

Haddow G. Embodiment and everyday cyborgs: Technologies that alter subjectivity [Internet]. Manchester (UK): Manchester University Press; 2021. Chapter 3, Reclaiming the cyborg.

Zhao Z. (2024). Diasporic Identity in Contemporary Sinophone Literature: The Role of Language and Cultural Elements. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 53(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10058-9