Yup. I think anyone who's ever taught undergrads in the states has
noticed this. The disparity in my experience diminishes somewhat in
graduate school but is still pretty obvious. There was no disparity,
as far as I can remember, among my cohort of students in Social Work.
Most of the class was female, and it was almost entirely Jewish and
New York (Yeshiva University). Everyone was aggressive as hell. And a
fair number had worked in the field before.
I have noticed consistently that what are called returning woman
students, mostly in their 30s and 40s, whose children have reached a
more independent age, and are earning the degree they for what ever
reason didn't when they were younger, absolutely dominate their
classes, even the few returning males. This was equally true in New
York, and in Tucson and San Diego, where male and female 18 to 22
year old students equally were extremely passive in class. And it was
true in psychology classes and english classes. The women were
fiercely eager to learn.
Does anybody notice an ethnic breakdown in the responsiveness of students?
Back to your observation. It does take some taming of the wilder
voices, and a lot of giving permission to the quieter voices. It
seems to work.
It would be great to hear other people's observations: we all have
only limited samples from our own experience. Is it the same in other
countries?
Mark
At 09:40 AM 3/31/2006, you wrote:
>I was taking a look at the culmination of two terms of discussion
>forum activity (I sort-of teach in a business school) for a final
>year undergraduate module and couldn't help but mull over a strange fact:
>
>there is approx a 50/50 gender split (as there has been for the last
>5 years) but yet again three-quarters+ of the discussion forum
>postings for this (academically difficult) module are from males.
>
>So many loud, authoritative voices.
>
>So much certainty.
>
>So few questions being asked.
>
>
>Student feedback questionnaires report that 85% of my students
>regard me as a very good or excellent teacher. The statistics are
>obviously bollocks or whatever is being measured is an irrelevance.
>
>I cannot ignore the evidence of my eyes or my gut instincts and so
>next year I will try again to draw out some of those silent voices
>because I am aware that they are there and that it is important.
>
>
>Tina
>
>
>>From: Mark Weiss <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to poetry and
>> poetics <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Re: Feminism: an aside
>>Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:17:42 -0500
>>
>>A little thoughtful is about right. You apparently see what you
>>want to, rather than what's written. For instance, the strategy I
>>proposed to end female circumcision goes rather beyond expressions
>>of outrage to two things that need to happen: culturally-aware
>>education, and increasing the economic choices of women. It's what
>>the workers on the ground are in fact doing. It's neither dramatic
>>nor glamorous nor nearly fast enough, but nothing else seems to
>>work at all. What I said was that anger isn't a plan. I wasn't
>>rying to taunt you.
>>
>>When you talked about systemic gender biases it was on the subject
>>of the legal system in relation to rape. I asked what you meant,
>>and then supplied what I thought it might be and what I think are
>>the problems with finding another way for the legal system to
>>operate. I'm still curious what you think about this. This also
>>wasn't a taunt, it was a request for clarification.
>>
>>Do you really think that rape in our society functions as a sexual
>>punishment, as opposed to corners of Pakistan, where a mass rape
>>was widely reported to have been a punishment for the men in the
>>woman's family, or the use of rape as a tactic by some armies at
>>war (and please, I'm not in the slightest making use of such
>>barbarisms)? You seem to imply that what you see as its
>>reinforcement by the judicial system is in some way intentional.
>>
>>So, a few of what I would think are obvious points. A third obvious
>>point (I thought) is that gender-bias is differentiated by social
>>class, and that any statistics that don't show a class breakdown
>>aren't doing their job, which is to target the problem so that the
>>always limited resources can be deployed most effectively. Why is
>>this problematic? What else in complex societies isn't class-differentiated?
>>
>>In my city it's not hard to find tabloids with pictures of men in
>>dog collars and worse, and it's also pretty easy to find
>>specialized leather shops geared to men. There's one on 18th Street
>>between 6th and 7th, for instance, that instead of a name on the
>>window has a scarlet neon noose. Very elegant. It also was pretty
>>easy in more-conservative San Diego: I can think of three on the
>>main drag of a very fashionable neighborhood. I did have to explain
>>these things to Carlos, and to warn him not to go into those places
>>by himself. Only a small number of men and women find these things
>>arousing, despite the tabloids. But is your point that men tend to
>>like to look at sexually provocative images of women? Sure. This
>>may be one of those facts of life that we have to learn to deal
>>with--it's been around long enough (think about the Venus of
>>Willendorf), and it's certainly not going away.
>>
>>This is not an attack against feminism--that's a cheap shot, and a
>>refusal to pay attention to crucial differences. It's impatience
>>with a particular kind of naive feminism. I'm sure you're aware of that.
>>
>>I don't remember calling you irrational, or angry, vengeful or man-hating.
>>
>>I've said what I have to say.
>>
>>Mark
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>At 06:30 PM 3/30/2006, you wrote:
>>>Today I find myself feeling a little thoughtful. Primarily, made thoughtful
>>>by how simply stating a fact - that there are systemic gendered biases that
>>>penalise women in certain very real ways in contemporary society (rather
>>>more so in the US than here, I think) is immediately to be labelled as an
>>>angry, vengeful, man-hating feminist. Irrational, I think Mark said,
>>>although I have been very careful to be rational; or full of impotent anger
>>>which leads nowhere. Again, Mark's taunt is, what are you going to do about
>>>it? You don't have a Plan (though one might as easily ask what his Plan is
>>>to combat female circumcision). The answer is, of course, that I do what I
>>>can, in all the aspects of my life: how I raise my sons and daughter, how I
>>>relate to men and women, how I write about art, how I write for young
>>>people, how I write poems; I am a writer, after all, and not an activist,
>>>and my main concerns are to do with complexity and process rather than
>>>ideological explication. But in all those activities, I am always thinking
>>>about the complexities of these issues, and act according to my thinking.
>>>
>>>The counterargument is always, but men suffer too. This is of course
>>>unarguable. Another is that gender, like all social patternings, is context
>>>specific. This is also correct. However, this does nothing to erase those
>>>inequities I quoted earlier, which exist in all societies.
>>>
>>>Women face specific prejudices because they are women. In the worst cases,
>>>this becomes punishment for being female, or for stepping outside the bounds
>>>of what is considered proper for women. (An example of what I mean is the
>>>subtext of the pro-life activists, who are not interested in making sure
>>>women and children have good lives - otherwise they would support
>>>contraception, education, welfare for single mothers, &c - but are
>>>interested in making sure that women are punished for having sex). The
>>>boundaries for men and women are very different: men have boundaries too,
>>>but for the moment I am not speaking about men. Rape is a kind of sexual
>>>punishment that is reinforced rather than otherwise by the judicial system.
>>>If the work of women is valued less than the work of men, it ensures that
>>>women don't value their work, something that is supported by all our
>>>economic markers (capitalist society would collapse without the unpaid and
>>>mainly unremarked and generally low-status work of women). All these
>>>mechanisms exist in a complex hierarchical economic system which also
>>>ensures that most men get it in the neck as well. But to say that women face
>>>specific problems in both macro and micro ways is not to say that men don't
>>>face problems. It is not to say that women are powerless, either. Nor that
>>>women don't participate in their own social subjugation. It is simply to say
>>>that these problems exist, and are real; and I wonder why what seems to me
>>>uncontroversially obvious (the rape statistics, the domestic violence
>>>statistics, the income statistics, which are only crude measurings of
>>>something much more complex and endemic) can be so quickly brushed aside as
>>>insignificant or simply wrong, subsumed in other arguments that centralise
>>>male problems, and that to be concerned about them is so easily to be
>>>dismissed as angry, irrational or extreme.
>>>
>>>Is it really just more palatable to speak about female circumcision (which
>>>is those others, not us) than it is to speak about manifest problems in our
>>>own societies? Is the 14 year old who gets breast implants for her birthday
>>>any less oppressed than the child who is genitally mutilated? Does the fact
>>>that she is making a "choice" in a consumerist society therefore make it ok?
>>>I have never seen outside a newsagents a picture of a naked man gagged and
>>>in a dog collar on all fours, as I have seen of a woman. I never had to
>>>explain such an image of men to my children. I have been dismissed from a
>>>job at which I was perfectly competent because I was a mother, and so
>>>couldn't be expected to be as committed as a childless woman, although the
>>>same question never arose with fathers. (By a woman, I might add). I see
>>>every day around me in the suburb where I live very damaged people, and
>>>women are damaged in quite specific ways that are different from the damages
>>>of men. And so on.
>>>
>>>Anyway, I'm not going to say much more about this. I have sometimes thought
>>>that the main line of attack against feminism is to bore women to death by
>>>making them repeat the obvious again and again until everyone is dizzy and
>>>has forgotten what the point was in the first place. In any case, it's been
>>>interesting watching the mechanisms of this discussion.
>>>
>>>All best
>>>
>>>A
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Alison Croggon
>>>
>>>Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
>>>Editor, Masthead: http://masthead.net.au
>>>Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com
|
