Gender studies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search Gender studies is a field of interdisciplinary study which analyses race, ethnicity, sexuality and location.[1] Gender study has many different forms. One view exposed by the philosopher Simone de Beauvoir said: "One is not born a woman, one becomes one".[2] This view proposes that in gender studies, the term "gender" should be used to refer to the social and cultural constructions of masculinities and femininities, not to the state of being male or female in its entirety.[3] However, this view is not held by all gender theorists. Other areas of gender study closely examine the role that the biological states of being male or female have on social constructs of gender. Specifically, in what way gender roles are defined by biology and how they are defined by cultural trends. The field emerged from a number of different areas: the sociology of the 1950s and later (see Sociology of gender); the theories of the psychoanalyst Jaques Lacan; and the work of feminists such as Judith Butler. Each field came to regard "gender" as a practice, sometimes referred to as something that is performative.[4] Feminist theory of psychoanalysis, articulated mainly by Julia Kristeva[5] (the "semiotic" and "abjection") and Bracha Ettinger[6] (the "matrixial trans-subjectivity" and the "primal mother-phantasies"), and informed both by Freud, Lacan and the Object relations theory, is very influential in gender studies.

Contents
[hide]
y y

y y y y

1 Studying gender 2 Influences of gender studies o 2.1 Gender studies and psychoanalytic theory  2.1.1 Sigmund Freud  2.1.2 Jacques Lacan  2.1.3 Julia Kristeva  2.1.4 Mark Blechner o 2.2 Literary theory o 2.3 Post-modern influence o 2.4 Visual theory 3 The development of gender theory o 3.1 History of gender studies o 3.2 Women's studies o 3.3 Men's studies o 3.4 Judith Butler 4 Criticism 5 Other people whose work is associated with gender studies 6 See also 7 References

y y

8 Bibliography 9 External links

[edit] Studying gender

Gender is an important area of study in many disciplines[citation needed], such as literary theory, drama studies, film theory, performance theory, contemporary art history, anthropology, sociology, psychology and psychoanalysis. These disciplines sometimes differ in their approaches to how and why they study gender. For instance in anthropology, sociology and psychology, gender is often studied as a practice, whereas in cultural studies representations of gender are more often examined. Gender studies is also a discipline in itself: an interdisciplinary area of study that incorporates methods and approaches from a wide range of disciplines.

[edit] Influences of gender studies

[edit] Gender studies and psychoanalytic theory
[edit] Sigmund Freud Some feminist critics have dismissed the work of Sigmund Freud as sexist, because of his view that women are 'mutilated and must learn to accept their lack of a penis' (in Freud's terms a "deformity").[7] On the other hand, feminist theorists such as Juliet Mitchell, Nancy Chodorow, Jessica Benjamin, Jane Gallop, Bracha Ettinger, Shoshana Felman, Griselda Pollock[8] and Jane Flax have argued that psychoanalytic theory is vital to the feminist project and must, like other theoretical traditions, be adapted by women to free it from vestiges of sexism. Shulamith Firestone, in "Freudianism: The Misguided Feminism", discusses how Freudianism is almost completely accurate, with the exception of one crucial detail: everywhere that Freud writes "penis", the word should be replaced with "power". [edit] Jacques Lacan Lacan's theory of sexuation organizes femininity and masculinity according to different unconscious structures. Both male and female subjects participate in the "phallic" organization, and the feminine side of sexuation is "supplementary" and not opposite or complementary.[9] Sexuation (sexual situation) the development of gender-roles and roleplay in childhood breaks down concepts of gender identity as innate or biologically determined. (clarify-refutes?challenges?)[10] Critics like Elizabeth Grosz accuse Jacques Lacan of maintaining a sexist tradition in psychoanalysis.[11] Others, such as Judith Butler, Bracha Ettinger and Jane Gallop have used Lacanian work, though in a critical way, to develop gender theory. [12][13][14] [edit] Julia Kristeva Main article: Julia Kristeva

Juli it i i i tl l t i l i ti j ti t uctures subjecti it upon t e abjection of t e mot er and argues t at t eway in which an indi idual excludes (or abjects) their mother as means of forming an identity is similar to the way in which societies are constructed. She contends that patriarchal cultures, li e indi iduals, have had to exclude the maternal and the feminine so that they can come into being.[15] [edi M k Blechner Mai arti l Mark Bl h r

Mark Blechner expanded psychoanalytic views of sex and gender, calling psychoanalysis "the once and future queer science".[16] He has argued that there is a "gender fetish" in western society, in which the gender of sexual partners is given enormously disproportionate attention over other factors involved in sexual attraction, such as age and social class. He proposes that the words "homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" be given prefixes, depending [1 on the dimension that is the same or different between partners. ] "Age heterosexuality" would indicate an attraction between people of different ages, for example. What is conventionally called "heterosexuality" (attraction between a man and a woman) would be called "gender heterosexuality". Cultures can have very different norms of maleness and masculinity. Blechner identifies the terror, in Western males, of penetration. Yet in many societies, being gay is defined only by being a male who lets himself be penetrated. Males who penetrate other males are considered [1 masculine and not gay and are not the targets of prejudice. ] In other cultures, however, receptive fellatio is the norm for early adolescence and seen as a requirement for developing normal manliness.[19]

[edi Li erary theory

Psychoanalytically oriented French feminism focused on visual and literary theory all along. Virginia Woolf's legacy as well as "Adrienne Rich's call for women's revisions of literary texts, and history as well, has galvani ed a generation of feminist authors to reply with texts of their own".[20] Griselda Pollock and other femininsts have articulated Myth and Poetry[21] and literature,[21][22][23] from the point of view of gender.

[edit] Post-modern infl ence

This section requires expansion. The emergence of post feminism affected gender studies,[10] causing a movement in theories identity away from the concept of fixed or essentialist gender identity, to post modern[24] fluid or multiple identities .[25] See Donna Haraway, Th Cyborg Manif to, as an example of post identity feminism. More recently, the relation between post modernism or post structuralism and masculinity has been considered. Masculinity can be taken as always in movement and never fixed or

stable. See Reeser, Masculinities in T eory (2010) for a comprehensive overview of this approach. Gender studies is criticized by Paul Nathanson and Katherine K. Young for being a discipline that "philosophizes, theorizes and politicizes on the nature of the female gender" as a social construct, to the point of excluding the male gender from analysis. They also claim that the 'gender' in gender studies is "routinely used as a synonym for 'women'.[29] Historian and theorist Bryan Palmer argues that the current reliance on poststructuralism with its reification of discourse and avoidance of the structures of oppression and struggles of resistance obscures the origins, meanings, and consequences of historical events and processes, and he seeks to counter the current "gender studies" with an argument for the necessity to analyze lived experience and the structures of subordination and power.[30] Pope Benedict XVI has denounced some of the gender theories, warning that they blur the distinction between male and female and could thus lead to the "self-destruction" of the human race.[31] He warned against the manipulation that takes place in national and international forums when the term "gender" is altered. "What is often expressed and understood by the term 'gender,' is definitively resolved in the self -emancipation of the human being from creation and the Creator," he warned. "Man wants to create himself, and to decide always and exclusively on his own about what concerns him." The Pontiff said this is man living "against truth, against the creating Spirit".[32] Rosi Braidotti has criticized gender studies as: "the take-over of the feminist agenda by studies on masculinity, which results in transferring funding from feminist faculty positions to other kinds of positions. There have been cases...of positions advertised as 'gender studies' being given away to the 'bright boys'. Some of the competitive take-over has to do with gay studies. Of special significance in this discussion is the role of the mainstream publisher Routledge who, in our opinion, is responsible for promoting gender as a way of deradicalizing the feminist agenda, re-marketing masculinity and gay male identity instead."[citation needed] Calvin Thomas countered that, "as Joseph llen Boone points out, 'many of the men in the academy who are feminism's most supportive 'allies' are gay,'" and that it is "disingenuous" to ignore the ways in which mainstream publishers such as Routledge have promoted feminist theorists.[citation needed ] Gynocentrism (Greek, gyno-, "woman, female") is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing female human beings or the feminine point of view at the center of one's world view. The perceptions, needs, and desires of women have primacy in this system, where the female view is the reference point or lens through which matters are analysed. Ideologically, gynocentrism prioritizes females hierarchically, as the overriding focus, and at the exclusion of all else. Observed in practice, the preeminence of women is seen as absolute: interpersonally, culturally, historically, politically, or in broader contexts socially (i.e. popular entertainment). It is the reverse of androcentrism where the male view is the central reference point.

Androcentrism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search Look up androcentrism in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Androcentrism (Greek, andro-, "man, male") is the practice, conscious or otherwise, of placing male human beings or the masculine point of view at the center of one's view of the world and its culture and history. The related adjective is androcentric, while the practice of placing the feminine point of view at the center is gynocentri .

Contents
[hide]
y y y y y y y y y y y y y y

1 Origin of the term 2 Education 3 Literature 4 TV and film 5 The arts 6 Generic male language 7 Generic male symbols 8 Politics and the law 9 Christianity 10 Sports 11 See also 12 Literature 13 References 14 External links

[edit] Ori in of the term

The term androcentri has been introduced as an analytic concept by Charlotte Perkins Gilman in the scientific debate. Perkins Gilman described androcentric practices in society and the resulting problems in her investigation on The Man-Made World; or, Our Androcentric Culture, published in 1911. Thus androcentrism can be understood as a societal fixation on masculinity whereby all things originate. Under androcentrism, masculinityis normative and all things outside of masculinity are defined as other. According to Perkins Gilman, masculine patterns of life and masculine mindsets claimed universality while female ones were considered as deviance.

[edit] Education



In the past boys and men were expected to have better formal education than girls and women. Girls and women were less frequently able to read and write than boys and men were. Therefore written material tended to reflect the male point of view. Well into the second half of the 20th century young men entered university far more frequently than young women. Some universities consciously practised a numerus clausus and restricted the number of female undergraduates they accepted. Therefore "educated opinion" risked being androcentric. Today women in industrialized countries have far better access to education.[1]

[edit] Literature
In Western societies today, books, magazine articles and book reviews are written predominantly by men and therefore may privilege a male viewpoint. For instance, in 2010 only 37% of the books published by Random House were written by women, and only 17% of the books reviewed by The New York Review of Books were written by women.[2] Research conducted by VID in 2010 found that men wrote the vast majority of articles and book reviews in leading magazines in the United States and the UK.[3] Research by Dr. David nderson and Dr. Mykol Hamilton has documented the underrepresentation of female characters in 200 top-selling children's books from 2001 and a seven-year sample of Caldecott award-winning books.[4] There were nearly twice as many male main characters as female main characters, and male characters appeared in illustrations 53 percent more than female characters. Most of the plot-lines centered around the male characters and their experiences of life.

[edit] TV and film

The vast majority of films are written and directed by men. This may result in an androcentric bias, with most films (and film characters) being created from a male perspective. Of the top 250 grossing films in 2007, 82% had no female writers and only 6% had a female director.[5] 70% of all film reviews published in the US are written by men.[6] Therefore, not only do men have more influence than women over the story-line and characters of most films, they also have the most influence when it comes to publicly reviewing. Because most film reviewers are male, androcentric films (films from a masculine viewpoint) may tend to receive more glowing reviews than female-centric films. 2009 study conducted by the Geena Davis Institute analysed 122 children's films (released between 2006 and 2009) and found both a male bias 'behind the scenes' of the films as well as a male bias in the content of the films.[7] Of this sample, 93% of directors, 87% of writers, and 80% of producers were male. Therefore, an androcentric (male) perspective was dominant in most of the films. The report argued that the male dominance behind most of the films was connected to a male bias (an androcentric bias) in the content of the films themselves. For instance, the majority (70.8%) of the speaking characters in these films were also male, and female characters were much more likely than male characters to be portrayed as beautiful. The report argued that "cinematic females are valued more than cinematic males for their looks, youthfulness, and sexy demeanor".

[edit] The arts

In 1985 a group of female artists from New York, the Guerrilla Girls, began to protest the under-representation of female artists. ccording to them, male artists and the male viewpoint continued to dominate the visual art world. In a 1989 poster (displayed on NYC buses) titled "Do women have to be naked to get into the Met. Museum?" they reported that less than 5% of the artists in the Modern rt sections of the Met. Museum were women, but 85% of the nudes were female.[8] Over twenty years later, women were still under-represented in the art world. In 2007, Jerry Saltz (journalist from the New York Times) criticized the Museum of Modern rt for undervaluing work by female artists. Of the 400 works of art he counted in the Museum of Modern rt, only 14 were by women (3.5%).[9] Saltz also found a significant underrepresentation of female artists in the six other art institutions he studied.[10]

[edit] Generic male language

In literature, the use of masculine language to refer to both men and women may indicate a male or androcentic bias in society where men are seen as the 'norm' and women as the 'other'. Some examples are forms of address (such as "Hey guys" or "Dear Sirs") and masculine nouns and pronouns (such as 'mankind', 'man' or 'he') to refer to both men and women. Philosophy scholar Jennifer Saul argued that the use of male generic language marginalizes women in society.[11] In recent years, some writers have started to use more gender-inclusive language (for instance, using the phrase "he or she", and using genderinclusive words like humankind, person, businessperson, fire-fighter, chairperson and policeofficer). Many Latin-based languages in the world are also male-centric. For instance, in Spanish the word padres (plural of 'father') means 'parents', abuelos (plural of 'grandfather') means 'grandparents', and c icos means either 'boys' or 'children'. Many studies have shown that male generic language is not interpreted as truly 'genderinclusive.'[12][13][14] Psychological research has shown that, in comparison to unbiased terms such as he or she and humankind, masculine terms lead to male-biased mental imagery in the mind of both the listener and the communicator. Three studies by Mykol Harrison show that there is not only a male people bias but also [15] a people male bias. In other words, a masculine bias remains even when people are exposed to only gender neutral language (although the bias is lessened). In two of her studies, half of the participants (after exposure to gender neutral language) had male-biased imagery but the rest of the participants displayed no gender bias at all. In her third study, only males showed a masculine-bias (after exposure to gender neutral language) females showed no gender bias. Harrison asserted that this may be due to the fact that males have grown up being able to think more easily than females of any person as generic he, since he applies to them.

[edit] Generic male symbols

The default images in Western society for 'man' and for 'human being' are usually the same. For example, the 'walking person' light (that indicates when it is safe for pedestrians to cross the road) looks the same as the symbol for 'man' on the door of a male restroom. The typical

symbol for 'woman' looks quite different (with long hair and a triangle body to indicate she is wearing a dress). On the internet, many avatars are gender-neutral (such as an image of a smiley face). However, when an avatar is human and discernibly gendered, it usually appears to be male.[16] This indicates that the image of a man (but not that of a woman) is considered to be a normative representation of humankind in general.

[edit] Politics and the law

In 2008 Rwanda became the first country in the world to have a female-majority Parliament (56% of seats).[17] s of March 2011, Rwanda remains the only country in the world to have a female majority Parliament. Most Parliaments in the world today are made up primarily of men; therefore there may be some androcentric bias (a privileging of male experiences and perspectives) in law-making. s of 31 January 2011, the global average of women in Parliament is 19%. In the Nordic countries the proportion of females in Parliament is high about 41% on average however the representation of women in Parliament in many other Western countries is much lower (for example, the proportion of women in Congress in the United States of merica is 17%[citation needed], and in the United Kingdom it is 22%). [18]

[edit] Christianity
Much of the development of Christianity, historically and today, has been primarily driven by men therefore our understanding of Christianity and the Bible may come from a more masculine perspective. The vast majority of Bibles available today were translated mainly by men. For instance, 93% of the New International Version (NIV) translators were male and 86% of the NRSV translators were male.[19] In most churches today, women are allowed to be leaders and to preach; however, the majority of churches are still led by a man, and most sermons are still delivered by men. Therefore, arguably, many Christian teachings come from a more masculine or androcentric viewpoint, and women's experiences and viewpoints can be marginalised. bout half of the Bible translations today use male generic words exclusively in genderinclusive context (words such as 'mankind', 'man, 'forefathers' and 'he')[20], arguably marginalizing women and making them invisible. Some of the more recent translations of the Bible have tried to use gender-accurate language where appropriate in the context. The 1989 New Revised Standard Version, NRSV, and the 2005 Today's New International Version, TNIV) are examples. ll of the known authors of the Bible are male. Most well-known biblical characters are men, and women make up only 14% of named characters in the bible (1,181 men are named in the Bible but only 188 women are named).[21][22][23] Therefore, the Bible is largely written from a male perspective and the experiences of women in the Bible are either invisible or are interpreted by men.

[edit] Sports
Sports media channels such as ESPN and Fox Sports, as well as sports magazines like Sports Illustrated, basically only appeal to a male audience. dditionally, this is reflected by its advertisers who almost exclusively target men.[citation needed]
Part of the Politics series

Basic forms of government

y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y

Androcracy Anarchy Aristocracy Autocracy Communist state Confederation Consociationalism Corporatocracy Corporatism Demarchy Democracy Despotism Empire Ethnocracy Fascist state Federation Feudalism Garrison state Gerontocracy Green state Hierocracy Isocracy Interregnum Kakistocracy Kratocracy Kleptocracy Kritarchy Kritocracy Kyriarchy

y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y

Logocracy Matriarchy Mediocracy Meritocracy Minarchism Monarchy Nanny state Nation-state Monocracy Nomocracy Noocracy Ochlocracy Oligarchy Panarchism Pantisocracy Parliamentary state Patriarchy Plantocracy Plutocracy Police state Polyarchy Presidential Puppet state Republic Socialist state Sociocracy Squirearchy Stratocracy Sultanism Superpower Supranational union Synarchy Technocracy Thalassocracy Theocracy Timocracy Tribal Tyranny Unitary state

Welfare state

List of forms of government

Politics portal vde

Patriarchy is a social system in which the role of the male as the primary authority figure is central to social organization, and where fathers hold authority over women, children, and property. It implies the institutions of male rule and privilege, and is dependent on female subordination. Historically, patriarchy has manifested itself in the social, legal, political, and economic organization of a range of different cultures. Patriarchy also has a strong influence on modern civilization, although many cultures have moved towards a more egalitarian social system over the past century.[1]

Contents
[hide]
y y y y y y y y

1 Definition and usage 2 History 3 Feminist theory 4 Biological vs. social theories 5 See also 6 References 7 Further reading 8 External links

[edit] Definition and usage

(patriark s), "father" or Patriarchy literally means "rule of fathers",[2][3] from "chief of a race, patriarch".[4][5] Historically, the term patriarchy was used to refer to autocratic rule by the male head of a family. However, in modern times, it more generally refers to social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men.[6][7][8][9]

[edit] History
Anthropological and historical evidence indicates that most prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies were generally relatively egalitarian, and that patriarchal social structures did not develop until many years after the end of the Pleistocene era, following social and

technological innovations such as agriculture and domestication.[10][11] However, according to Robert M. Strozier, historical research has not yet found a specific "initiating event" of the origin of patriarchy.[12] Some scholars point to about six thousand years ago (4000 BCE), when the concept of fatherhood took root, as the beginning of the spread of patriarchy.[13][14] Domination by men of women is found in the Ancient Near East as far back as 3100 BCE, as are restrictions on a woman's reproductive capacity and exclusion from "the process of representing or the construction of history".[12] With the appearance of the Hebrews, there is also "the exclusion of woman from the God-humanity covenant".[12][15] However, see Jesus and women. The works of Aristotle viewed women as morally, intellectually, and physically inferior to men; saw women as the property of men; claimed that women's role in society was to reproduce and serve men in the household; and saw male domination of women as natural and virtuous.[16][17][18] Egypt left no philosophical record, but Herodotus left a record of his shock at the contrast between the roles of Egyptian women and the women of Athens. He observed that Egyptian women attended market and were employed in trade. In ancient Egypt a middle-class woman might sit on a local tribunal, engage in real estate transactions, and inherit or bequeath property. Women also secured loans, and witnessed legal documents. Greek influence spread, however, with the conquests of Alexander the Great, who was educated by Aristotle.[19] From the time of Martin Luther, Protestantism regularly used the commandment in Exodus 20:12 to justify the duties owed to all superiors. Honor thy father, became a euphemism for the duty to obey the king. But it was primarily as a secular doctrine that Aristotles appeal took on political meaning. Although many 16th and 17th Century theorists agreed with Aristotles views concerning the place of women in society, none of them tried to prove political obligation on the basis of the patriarchal family until sometime after 1680. The patriarchal political theory is associated primarily with Sir Robert Filmer. Sometime before 1653, Filmer completed a work entitled Patriarc a. However, it was not published until after his death. In it, he defended the divine right of kings as having title inherited from Adam, the first man of the human race, according to Judeo-Christian tradition.[20][unreliable source?] In the 19th Century, various women began to question to commonly accepted patriarchal interpretation of Christian scripture. One of the foremost of these was Sarah Grimk, who voiced skepticism about the ability of men to translate and interpret passages relating to the roles of the sexes without bias. She proposed alternative translations and interpretations of passages relating to women, and she applied historical and cultural criticism to a number of verses, arguing that their admonitions applied to specific historical situations, and were not to be viewed as universal commands.[21] Elizabeth Cady Stanton used Grimks criticism of biblical sources to establish a basis for feminist thought. She published T e Woman's Bible, which proposed a feminist reading of the Old and New Testament. This tendency was enlarged by feminist theory, which denounced the patriarchal Judeo-Christian tradition.[22]

[edit] Feminist theory

Most forms of feminism characterize patriarchy as an unjust social system that is oppressive to women. As feminist and political theorist Carole Pateman writes, "The patriarchal

construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection."[23] In feminist theory the concept of patriarchy often includes all the social mechanisms that reproduce and exert male dominance over women. Feminist theory typically characteri es patriarchy as a social construction, which can be [24] overcome by revealing and critically analyzing its manifestations.

[edit] Biological vs. social theories

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (May 2010) Most sociologists reject predominantly biological explanations of patriarchy and contend that social and cultural conditioning is primarily responsible for establishing male and female gender roles.[25][26] According to standard sociological theory, patriarchy is the result o f [25] sociological constructions that are passed down from generation to generation. These constructions are most pronounced in societies with traditional cultures and less e conomic [27] development. Even in modern developed societies, however, gender messages conveyed by family, mass media, and other institutions largely favor males having a dominant statu [26] s. Some sociobiologists, such as Steven Goldberg, argue that social behavior is primarily determined by genetics, and thus that patriarchy arises more as a result of inherent biology than social conditioning. Goldberg also contends that patriarchy is a universal feature of human culture. In 1973, Goldberg wrote, "The ethnographic studies of every society that has ever been observed explicitly state that these feelings were present, there is literally no variation at all."[28] Goldberg has critics among anthropologists. Concerning Goldberg's claims about the "feelings of both men and women" Eleanor Leacock countered th the data at on women's attitudes are "sparse and contradictory", and that the data on male attitudes about male-female relations are "ambiguous". Also, the effects of colonialism on the cultures represented in the studies were not considered.[29] There is considerable variation in the role that gender plays in human societies. Although there are no known examples of strictly matriarchal cultures,[30] there are a number of societies that have been shown to be matrilinear or matrilocal and gynocentric, especially among indigenous tribal groups.[31] Some hunter-gatherer groups have been characterized as largely egalitarian.