Smiley Face - 4/28

The format of today's class was unexpected, scary, and liberating at the same time. I have always been raised not to talk out of place or argue for something I don't really understand. That's why I found it quite right when such actions were played out today with the men not being allowed to talk, and giving the stage to women to discuss what we know best: women. As much as women gossip and chat all the time, it is rarely about our place in society or our presence in the shadow of the male. It is something that must be discussed more often, for the recognition of ones place in society sparks awareness and often times consequent actions to change the status quo.
The term that sparked my awareness for the necessity of change was about the phallologocentric nature of language and its uses. Men dominate the vocal aspect of language while women passively live in a world of written communication. The main differences between these two uses of language is that speech cannot be edited: once something is said, or not said, it can not be taken back. As a result men use this means of communication to determine hegemonic structures of hierarchy to maintain the availability of the masculine image as the goal. On the other hand, the genre of writing as a whole leaves room for someone to decide whether or not it gets communicated to a broader audience (look at publishers). Furthermore, men provide women a space to communicate when men are still the ones who determine what to broadcast. Writing acts as a controlled means of expression.
Even from a historian perspective women would take on the identity of men to be heard. The passivity of women in communication reflects their stereotype in society and is therefore an easy identity for them to hide behind. Furthermore, when looking at women who are unsatisfied with this constrained world come the stereotypes of feminists as angry lesbians when really this stereotype comes from men in everyday spoken language (for example when comments like: 'god your such a feminist' when a women rebels against any sexist comment, and within that comment is attached a tone of judgment contributing to the fear of women to speak out loud).
Another point I would like to discuss briefly is history and, quite frankly, the irony of it. The information and actions of the past are meant to be presented as unbiased truths that have evidence of occurring. One question I have is, how are we going to know the real history? What's done is done and all we can do is look at the evidence that remains, but even then there is so much missing in our collection of the past, its easy for the dominant gender to take what is left and use it to perpetuate further superiority to attain masculinity. One quick example would be Queen Elizabeth I, a woman who were honored world-wide for her rule of England at a time it needed it yet at the same time she never married and did not even fight for women's rights while in the most powerful position in the world. As much as she was in a position of power, her history still comes from the perspective of men.
At the end of the day, these discussions help spark awareness that is crucial to any form of change. Sure one could see todays class as a bunch of girls talking about girls, but I see it as a reflection on our experiences as women in a society directed by men and therefore a new awareness that others often times feel the same and that it's ok to speak out.