Thursday, October 1, 2009

Race, Class, Gender....oh my!

So we've been fielding (ever since we announced) but more so, ever since we had the ultrasound the 'sex' question, no NOT THAT ONE, the "will we find out the sex of the baby" question.

We've decided that we want to know. For one thing after 20 weeks I'm sure that I will want to call the little one something other than, the little one, the third one, the one, the baby, it, and then there is Daniel's list of Greek heroes: Athena, Hermes, Achilles, and Hercules (he obviously thinks that the baby will either sprout from my head, be faster than light, or be 10 feet tall with weak ankles!) And we wouldn't want the little one getting a hero complex too early in life, it would stunt the emotional development!

For another thing, it's true, there are some names and some clothes and some colors for the nursery that I just wouldn't do or have for a little girl or little boy. But that point brings me to the crux of this post.

I try and teach in my philosophy class the beginning fragments of race, class, gender, and sexual orientation consciousness. It's not all I teach in my classes, nor is it the focus. But I try to make sure that throughout the semester my students are exposed to the idea that those things can be socially constructed, that those characteristics are used to dominate and control groups of persons, and that we normalize white, male, middle-class, straight values in our society.

Today was the day that I brought it all up big time. I call it my RCG explosion day. It never goes over very well. I always have a few students who voice awkward racist/classist/sexist statements all prefaced by saying, "I know this sounds bad but....." And I always watch my minority students sit very still, with wide open eyes, watching me carefully for what I will say and watching the other students as they judge the tone of the classroom. It's really difficult to moderate well. I'm still not good at it but I'm learning.

It's always a very challenging day. I struggle to remind myself that my students are young and have not seen much of the world and that they ARE entitled to their beliefs and opinions and values. They also struggle because I challenge them and they are forced to reflect on questions that our U.S. society hides from.

And deep down I do empathize with them. I'm not radical enough to raise our baby without a gender like that family in Sweden is doing. I probably will dress our little girl in dresses or our little boy in little pant suits. I'm not going to name our baby some tribal name from a West African village in order to challenge society. I'm sure that I will normalize values from my family and the dominant culture in which I reside.

But while I empathize with them, while I care that they are struggling I also can't bear to bring up a child in a world that isn't just, that isn't struggling to always make its self better and more good. And that means that I am going to keep having RCG Explosion day over and over again...however difficult and however long of a nap I need afterward.

And however much that I will have to explain over and over again to my dear family, I know that women can vote, I know that women can be in the Senate but damn it THERE IS STILL A PLACE FOR THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT around here!

Peace To All.

3 comments:

  1. Why don't you post a section from your RCG explosion online? I'd be interested to see just how far you think the idea of 'social construction' (environmental determinism) can be used to deny or negate the genetic basis for the indisputable fact of evolved sexual differences. As a start, I'll post a link to a short essay I think you'll find interesting. It's written by Professor Helena Cronin from LSE and deals with issues between Darwinism, Feminism and social policy (her essay starts on page 58):
    http://books.google.com/books?id=e37EpNRgunEC&pg=PA7-IA5&lpg=PA7-IA5&dq=science+at+the+edge+contributors&source=bl&ots=6rvMa148Vu&sig=ZWSX_xGmvov6rqOT1aCjI7sAzng&hl=en&ei=PFfHSrbxJJTk8Qbp9KHhCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=science%20at%20the%20edge%20contributors&f=false

    ReplyDelete
  2. I can't access the essay. Without reading it I would hate to comment too much. Also, my teaching is based on discussion so there is nothing to post online. I'm not sure that social construction is environmental determinism. Nor, do I think that it negates sexual difference. I think it is Luce Irigaray who writes that within difference exists all possibility. Certainly the point of the class is not to destroy difference but rather to celebrate it.
    To answer your question: What is more probable is that there is not an absolute link between sex and gender. Sex is a much more ridid biological definition while gender is both often closely aligned with certain sexual characteristics and carries with it strong social norms. The point of my class is not to expound social constructivism nor to reteach biology but to challenge students to reflect on the norms our society has given to race, gender, class, and sexual orientation. And, more importantly what the project of education's response must be to these norms: should we teach our student's to question society? or should we teacher our student's to conform to society? or is there another option? Importantly, also, I think important to teach that our societal norms are often used to disempower and disenfrancise certain members of the populace and often students are naivelly unaware of these occurances.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, it's too bad you can't just cut and paste the essay into your browser, as I believe it has much to suggest about the way gender comes to feature in self image. And, yes, gender is more flexible than anatomical sexuality, but - and this is what the essay points to - it still retains an irreducible basis in genetical dispositions...

    ReplyDelete