The language piece was also one that I was interested in as far as Feminist theory is concerned. But why?
As Barry and Hooks examine, language is one of the "most conscientious areas of feminine criticism" (Barry 124). Language is, by far, the most difficult aspect of our culture to change. Look at how many influences it has had over the 1000s of years of use. How, then, do theorists expect to change it in the speed in which they desire? The "creation" of "ecriture feminine" appears to me the same words we currently use, only in a celebration of the matriarchal (i.e. "impregnable, surrogate umbilical cord" (Barry 122)).
Let's think about this for a moment. What can we say through either writing or speaking that CAN'T be construed as patriarchal? Nothing -- look at the first letter in every sentence. It's capitalized -- obviously a phallus. Homecoming (which my school is going through this week...I hate my life) is an obvious celebration of when the father figure came home after he was away for significant periods of time working. The use of the male pronoun when addressing groups: "Whats up guys."
Some of this can be changed through a slow, laborious process. Which I have a hard time with, but, hey let's go for it. I like having language accessible to more people, and if we can get the feminists on board, lets make them happy. Others I think are taking it a bit too far: Manhole for instance. Personhole? I think not. Or, according to the ecriture feminine, "the opening in the street where humans enter to work under the ground." Try filling out an order for 1000 "Manhole covers." Oh boy.
A while back I worked a booth at a "Take Back the Night" rally here on campus. I overheard two young women saying they almost didn't attend because they were sure the place would be filled with "femi-nazis" (thanks Mr. Limbaugh), as though rape were only a problem for women who thought of themselves as feminist.
ReplyDeletehooks points to the illusion that "we are better off [now]than we [really] are" (114).
There no longer seems to be urgency associated with changing the dominant patriarchal mindset, leading many to believe feminists who still insist on close attention to language (postal carrier instead of mailman, wait-person instead of waitress, etc) are just being excessive.
But how we speak is how we think:
"Since masses of young females know little about feminism and many falsely assume that sexism is no longer a problem, feminist education for critical consciousness must be continuous" (hooks 17) - no matter how awkward the phrasing of a new language might seem.
In my 25 years of church work, I observed that language was the issue that always aroused the most emotion. In the Roman Catholic church, theologians (men) insist that "For us and for all men" really means all humans. They insist that it is a small thing; that it doesn't really matter; that changing it will destroy the beauty of the liturgy. These men can study it until Christmas, but when I hear "all men," I don't assume it applies to me. If someone came into our classroom and asked "all men" to stand, I wouldn't stand. And I'll bet neither would most of the women. If it's really such a small thing, something that doesn't really matter, let's change it and see what happens. The fact is that in any Catholic congregation there are people (perhaps a lot of people) who merely pause at those words, then catch back up after them. Is the community's prayer ruined because of this omission? I think not.
ReplyDeleteOur language is so entrenched in sexist language that most people just take it forgranted that the language of power and religion and politics is masculine. The French language is extremely sexist as every noun is masculine or feminine. For example, the word "nurse" is feminine, and "doctor" is masculine. English may have removed the visible sexism, but it is still deeply ingrained in our subconscious.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that feminists are asking for an immediate change in language, I just think they are asking for the recognition. Look how quickly the "PC" movement is occurring and how people are becoming more cognizant of what they say or how they phrase statements in order not to offend others (ethnicity). It’s not about making feminists “happy”, it’s more of a respect issue I feel. Yes, it is a male oriented language, and not every word can be changed to suit gender (like your “man-hole”) but words or phrases that discuss equality should be attempt a gender neutral mask. This is not the Battle of Hastings, and language cannot be instantly changed, but I also don’t feel that it should take 200 years for such recognition to occur.
ReplyDelete