Corpos como projeto: queerizando práticas de representação

Abstract

This study aims to investigate, based on the syllabi of ergonomics courses in design programs at Brazilian universities, how bodies are represented—both visually and textually—in the most frequently cited bibliographies. It is based on the understanding that, throughout history, the body has been the subject of study, classification, and standardization, even before the consolidation of anthropology as a scientific field in the late 19th century. Examples such as the Vitruvian Man demonstrate how certain conceptions of proportion, symmetry, and the ideal body have historically been mobilized to define standards of humanity, functionality, and beauty. Tensions surrounding the body, therefore, are not recent. Dissident bodies have historically been subjected to processes of control, erasure, and retaliation, often supported by religious, medical, and biologizing justifications. However, the contemporary collaboration between social movements and academic research has brought to light issues that were long hidden, silenced, or narrated from perspectives external to the dissident bodily experiences themselves. Within the context of Western culture, tools for measurement, classification, and representation were created that still contribute today to the perpetuation of a normative idea of the body. Ergonomics and anthropometry, when incorporated into the field of design, can be important tools for developing projects that are better suited to people. However, when based on restrictive body models, they can also reinforce binary, cisgender, and, at times, sexist perspectives in the ways the human body, its measurements, capabilities, and uses are represented. Building on this issue, the research brings together concepts of gender, sexuality, and corporeality to explore how to construct new bodily imaginaries in design. To this end, it begins by introducing the field of physical ergonomics, with a particular focus on anthropometry, understanding it as a historically significant tool that is nonetheless shaped by political, epistemological, and visual choices. Next, it analyzes the syllabi of ergonomics courses, critically reflecting on how this field has produced certain representations of the body. Finally, it explores dissident and queer practices, pointing toward ways to construct a more inclusive visual and textual lexicon, capable of reimagining anthropometry as an expanded tool for design projects committed to bodily plurality.