Presentation on theme: "Is there such a thing as a woman or a man? lecture 7."— Presentation transcript:
Is there such a thing as a woman or a man? lecture 7
lecture overview 1.cultural turn: shift from things to words 2.is language masculine?: Luce Irigaray 3.semiotics: Ferdinand Saussure 4.poststructuralists and meaning 5.decentered subject
lecture overview 6.discourse: Michel Foucault 7.gender as performative: Judith Butler 8.criticisms of Judith Butler 9.summary
cultural/linguistic turn 1.shift from things to words (Barrett 1997) 2.things (material) – e.g. housework; inequalities in the labour market; male violence 3.words (symbolic) – e.g. focus on discourse representation and language
gender and the linguistic turn 1.feminists influenced by postuctructuralism/postmodernism 2.language does not simply reflect but actively constructs reality 3. misrecognise - take as natural what is linguistically constructed? 4.gender is shaped by social structures and by dominant discourses 5.claim: language constructs what it means to be a man or a woman
e.g. identity (Hall cited in Abbott et al 2005: 358) …instead of thinking of identity as an already accomplished fact, which cultural practices then represent, we should think, instead, of identity as a production, which is never complete, always in process, and always constituted within, not outside representation.
is language masculine? e.g. Luce Irigaray 1.New French feminist 2.current language is patriarchal – contains masculinist assumptions 3.need to develop truly feminine language 4.so women can express themselves in non-patriarchal ways 5.how possible is this? 6.how plausible is it as a strategy? 7.is it essentialist?
semiotics: basic points 1.a culture invests things with certain meanings 2.meanings are arbitrary 3.semiotics reveals the arbitrary nature of meanings 4.semiotics reveals the power relations - disguised by meanings - reproduced in meanings
semiotics: Ferdinand Saussure (1) 1.father of modern linguistics 2.linguistic structuralist 3.culture is structured like a language and language is also structured in a particular way. e.g. meanings of masculinity and femininity differ – culturally, linguistically and historically 4.langue – system of language; the whole language e.g. German, English 5.parole – individuals speech; individuals use of langue
semiotics: Ferdinand Saussure (2) langue is a system of signs sign – word (letters, noise) signified – the representation or meaning of a particular thing (but NOT the real thing itself) signifier – points to the signified (e.g. word sheep indicates the idea of an ovine farm animal)
words are not always translatable 1.e.g. in the English language sheep just refers to the idea of the sheep as an animal 2.In the French language the wordmouton refers to the idea of the sheep as an animal and meat (mutton)
woman signified – idea of woman – no such thing as woman -purely linguistic construct -varies between languages signifier THE SIGN
semiotics: Ferdinand Saussure (3) 1.arbitrary nature of the sign – no natural or obvious link between the signifier and signified. 2.signs do not have a fixed or essential meaning 3.through social convention come to learn which signifier refers to which signifier 4.meaning of signs is relational - constructed through difference: e.g. whore – other signifiers of womanhood (virgin or mother)
poststructuralists and meaning 1. e.g. Jacques Derrida - claims that meaning is never fixed but is in constant flux 2.so the meaning of the signifier woman (and man?) – always on the move 3.keen to explore how meanings become fixed and consider the effects of fixity 4.power fixes meanings deconstruction refers to the process of releasing and keeping meanings in flux e.g. category of woman ( see also debate: Riley /Stanley 1997 in Kemp & Squires)
decentered subject self is constructed self is constructed by different language each language creates its own particular sense of self a particular subject can be shaped by multiple languages multiple selves – contradictory self
discourse: Michel Foucault different professional groups (e.g. sexologists; psychiatrists; doctors) distinctive knowledge – claims to truth categorises or labels people (e.g. sane/insane; hysterical woman/normal man) panoptic effect – shapes thinking and actions (self- regulate in light of norms) produces the subject -idea of the hysterical woman - and in practice person acts accordingly
gender as performative: Butler (1) representation like Saussure – language creates reality woman is not a biological category sex is socially constructed sex is a linguistic category – no such thing as biological sex sexuality – cultural resource to resist patriarchal oppression and heterosexual hegemony?
gender as performative: (2) using language: doing words J.L. Austin (Speech Act Theory) – when you use language it constitutes reality when use the term woman it creates woman e.g. its a girl
gender as performative: (3) everyday performances language regulates thought and actions labelled a man or a woman – perform according to norms (heterosexual matrix) gender is an ongoing everyday achievement misrecognise: doing being a woman or a man as actually being a real woman or man
gender as performative (4) gender is an act that brings into being what it names: a masculine man or feminine woman (Salih, 2002:64) language constitutes gendered identities no doer or I outside language – gendered subjects are the effects of language gender trouble – attempts to reveal or upset the fictional fixity of gender – e.g. Drag
some criticisms of Butler universalising tendencies – e.g. heterosexual hegemony replaces patriarchy? girling seems like a socialisation thesis fail to keep gender open as promised? does feminism need a stable subject?
summary no truth out there waiting to be discovered we construct theories and reality through representation power/knowledge produces material effects – e.g. produces gendered subjects, disciplines bodies no power without resistance can we trouble gendered power regimes by resisting binary classifications?