This week we were discussing the article about how princess stereotypes can actually be harmful in the development of young girls. The text argued that it automatically drives girls into being good, caring and in conformity which eventually leads to decreasing opportunities in the future.
As I have a 3,5 years old daughter I have empirical knowledge of my own. I´ve never pushed kids into certain roles i.e my son plays with dolls oocasionally with his sister etc. But I somewhat agree with the article´s notion about the innate choices, such as our son plays "girls" games but he tends to play more with cars or play football. The same goes with our daughter, she plays football too, but she values her dolls more. Of course they could have picked these things along the way, but we haven´t coarsed them into specific roles.
As relation to language I´m anxiously waiting to hear when the difference arises when using language. I remember from another course where we were analysing texts and deciding whether or not they were written by a woman. The were some tendencies such as female writers used more descriptive language and long phrases than male writers. However at another course I came across this female writer who used an alias and wrote as a man in order to be more credible (long time ago, 19th century or so...). As regards to language I don´t these things are innate, rather something we probably learn in school. I´ll end this text with a universal question: Why is it that when a female curses it is regarded somehow worse and aggressive? And I somewhat agree with this, or at least I sort of notice it better when a girl curses.
torstai 18. helmikuuta 2010
maanantai 15. helmikuuta 2010
Third meeting (the cosmo article)
This week we were discussing the article about how guys handle their breakups. The text consisted of stereotypical concepts about men, and as a man, I found them actually untrue - at least some of them. This ultimately lead me to believe the article itself was written by a woman.
In the Cosmo article there was a point that was emphasized - the ability for men to quickly rebound from a breakup. The text implied that men were actively thinking of future conquests immediately after breakups, "hook up with new chicks" etc... However it left me wondering that does this imply that the situation is completely the opposite for women? This thought reminded me of a commercial on tv:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7cQB_dNeQQ
Where the guy is immediately thinking of "hooking up with new chicks". (Disregard the female character as one gets the impression from the commercial that she won´t be devastated for long).
In the Cosmo article there was a point that was emphasized - the ability for men to quickly rebound from a breakup. The text implied that men were actively thinking of future conquests immediately after breakups, "hook up with new chicks" etc... However it left me wondering that does this imply that the situation is completely the opposite for women? This thought reminded me of a commercial on tv:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7cQB_dNeQQ
Where the guy is immediately thinking of "hooking up with new chicks". (Disregard the female character as one gets the impression from the commercial that she won´t be devastated for long).
maanantai 8. helmikuuta 2010
Second time around
As I´m writing these first entries a bit late, I might have already forgotten about something that caught my interest, but I´ll try to do my best to remember them. Furthermore I´ll correct my ways here on out and (try to) write on the day the class was held.
To be honest I have the least recollection on the second meeting. We were discussing the text written by Bucholz(?) and I recall we were concentrating on the theoretical framework, so to speak, and it had many things that had crossed my path before, in the form of different analysis (CDA, CA etc.) types. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that I was sitting in the back of the room? Hence I now have empirical data that sitting in the front of the classroom makes you more concentrated, I guess.
Despite my vague memories, I think it´s interesting to think of how much effect discourse really has. One can initiate conflicts, make someone feel better, create new knowledge, shift behaviour (writing laws) and much more. In this regard it is important to understand and learn to "read" texts and interpret meanings, since gendered meanings tend to come out without the speaker really meaning it eg. My workmate (woman) had some trouble with a frozen gaspump or something and this middleaged man gets out his car and says (accompanied with a grin) "mikäs tytöllä on täällä hätänä?" While he could have left out the "girl" part he decided to use it, however he found himself in the same predicament and couldn´t work out his magic...
To be honest I have the least recollection on the second meeting. We were discussing the text written by Bucholz(?) and I recall we were concentrating on the theoretical framework, so to speak, and it had many things that had crossed my path before, in the form of different analysis (CDA, CA etc.) types. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that I was sitting in the back of the room? Hence I now have empirical data that sitting in the front of the classroom makes you more concentrated, I guess.
Despite my vague memories, I think it´s interesting to think of how much effect discourse really has. One can initiate conflicts, make someone feel better, create new knowledge, shift behaviour (writing laws) and much more. In this regard it is important to understand and learn to "read" texts and interpret meanings, since gendered meanings tend to come out without the speaker really meaning it eg. My workmate (woman) had some trouble with a frozen gaspump or something and this middleaged man gets out his car and says (accompanied with a grin) "mikäs tytöllä on täällä hätänä?" While he could have left out the "girl" part he decided to use it, however he found himself in the same predicament and couldn´t work out his magic...
First class in January 2010
It is quite fascinating to produce the work for a course by writing a blog and as this is new to me, please excuse the probable mistakes...
When I chose to attend this class I was expecting a low turnout of men, which is quite common for any course given by the language department, but touching upon the topic of discourse and gender in other courses lead me to this course. The first class was interesting, especially the clip from Harry Enfield show, which reminded me of a standup comedien who also plays with these stereotypical concepts of men and women and gender differences - Dane Cook. A very funny guy.
It is quite interesting to see these gendered expectations in modern societies and I am fascinated to attend a class that has a "feminist" ring to it. And I did learn new things that I hadn´t heard before, such as the concept of acquiring a gender and that it isn´t innate in us. This was interesting to think about...
The first class left a good impression and I feel like we are going to have interesting conversations during the course.
When I chose to attend this class I was expecting a low turnout of men, which is quite common for any course given by the language department, but touching upon the topic of discourse and gender in other courses lead me to this course. The first class was interesting, especially the clip from Harry Enfield show, which reminded me of a standup comedien who also plays with these stereotypical concepts of men and women and gender differences - Dane Cook. A very funny guy.
It is quite interesting to see these gendered expectations in modern societies and I am fascinated to attend a class that has a "feminist" ring to it. And I did learn new things that I hadn´t heard before, such as the concept of acquiring a gender and that it isn´t innate in us. This was interesting to think about...
The first class left a good impression and I feel like we are going to have interesting conversations during the course.
Tilaa:
Blogitekstit (Atom)