At the beginning of Wednesday's class we discussed our papers, and possible ways to go about improving them for the re-write. We went on to discuss Mathieu and Turkle's articles, and briefly touched upon ideas from hooks.
How can Matheiu's article be related to paper topic #2: definitions of Woman?
* Theories of different authors we have read could fall into Matieu's three categories.
*Wittig's "heterosexual contract" - all of society is organized around this. This would fit in to a sociological approach. Biology is related to social structure, and not "natural."
What discipline is Mathieu writing in?
*Anthropological- She looks at African, Indian and Native American cultures.
* It was suggested that she is not necessarily drawing direct comparisons with the West- but she is using it as a base or term of comparison.
What is the main idea of her argument?
Some ideas generated on this were:
*Sex is a symbol of gender.
*The issue is more complicated than one being labelled biological and the other social.
*Sex doesn't have to symbolize gender.
*Gender as sociological- But Mathieu moves beyond Epstein.
Are Mathieu's claims global?
*She is trying to make universal claims- Sex and gender have infinite permutations of relationship to one another.
*However, Mathieu uses no European or North American examples (besides the Native American berdache)
*Is she using "primitive" cultures and using a global approach so as not to set these cultures off as "other"?
*She uses no Western examples to deconstruct the very sex/gender paradigm that Westerners have set up.
*Is she implying a glance into the past that Epstein warns about? Using isolated cultures that have remained "archaic"? Or is this to point to a contrast with the Western world?
Mathieu does use one example from ancient Greece- homosexual relations between men and boys.
*Swahili Muslims of Mombasa example- Homosexuality is tolerated among both males and females, but for females only after procreation.
How can Turkle be brought into the discussion?
What is the importance of looking at the internet?
*Internet as a different culture- the gender switching that occurs there is not happening in real life.
*If we are not active on the internet, how do we discuss it?
*Internet chat experience is like free speech without knowing where it's coming from
*Changing identity on the internet- particularly gender- can be a power trip.
*Provides the possibility of self-invention. This brings up the issue of lying. (Turkle uses the psychiatrist example.)
*What are the lines between lying and fantasy?
*Differences in male and female views of aggression or assertive behavior become apparent in Turkle's article- bitch vs. empowered woman etc.
*Does the internet provide a way to act out personality factors that aren't necessarily gendered?
*What is the definition of infidelity? Turkle brings up this question. Are experiences you couldn't have in real life, but only on the internet "cheating" etc.
Perhaps the internet serves a function that societies Mathieu discusses already have built in- the opportunity to change identities. We have immovable identites, more or less, from very early on.
*Does the internet provide outlet space? Are we just perpetuating stereotypres in pretending to be what we're not? For example- helping is the same across genders- but maybe we just view it differently. Turkle's example of the man interacting in MUDs as a woman to help other women and his experiences illustrates this point.
How does all of this pertain to constructin of African American identity?
*Race on the internet- is it discussed? What are our assumptions?
Finally,
Judith Butler and her book "Gender Trouble." She proposes:
*Definitions of gender take sex as a given. Sex is predicated on gender. These ideas represent a cycle with the conclusion that there is no origin of gender.
Can we ever get out of these categories?
We should always be careful to consider the reality of what we are saying when talking in and about these categories
notes by Amy Bergholtz