Upon reading bell hook’s Teaching to Transgress: Education as the
Practice of Freedom, I was pleased to see that her response to Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed was similar to
that of my own: where is the mention of gender?
While I did not go as far to articulate it as “sexism of language” and a
“[construction] of a phallocentric paradigm of liberation” (p. 49).
But, as hooks continues, there is value in Freire’s
work, despite its explicit sexism. There
is value in John Dewey’s Experience and
Education, despite his reluctance to admit that women can exist as students
in a classroom. I found it easy to
dismiss this overt sexism as an unfortunate characteristic of that historical
period, but I wonder if that should be the case. Unlike hooks, I did not share
the same thirst for change; her parallel between privilege in resources and
privilege in a desire to change was breathtaking. Does my lack of “thirst” result only in a
wasting of resources? Or can my dissatisfaction
with those resources serve as a catalyst for change? Does this translate to silent acceptance of
the status quo?
Being that hooks is known for works
such as Feminist Theory, connecting
her works to gender is an easy task. In Teaching to Transgress, she has entire
(albeit short) chapters devoted to “Feminist Scholarship” and “Feminist
Thinking.” I want to pull at a possibly
tangential aspect of gender. hook's
interview with Ron Scapp touched on an area of interest for me: the presence of
the body in the classroom. hooks and
Scapp explored the existence of the professor’s body in the classroom as an
indication of power: “the person who is most powerful as the privilege of
denying their body” (p. 137). hooks elaborates
on how “the erasure of the body connects to the erasure of class differences,
and more importantly the erasure of the role of university settings as sites
for the reproduction of a privileged class of values, of elitism” (p. 140). Similarly,
hooks argues against the mind/body split that allows for a compartmentalization
of academic life (of the mind, yet broken/abused/damaged) and the suppressed,
unmentioned other (the body). This split
is further characterized as the public (mind) and private (body).
A University of New Mexico
evolutionary psychologist by the name of Geoffrey Miller tweeted a discriminatory
message (which he later recanted and apologized for his lack of discretion, all
of which was executed in under 280 characters).
Just as hooks had asserted, “the
person who is most powerful as the privilege of denying their body” (p. 137). While this was stated in reference to the
body of the instructor, I think I also concerns the other bodies in the classroom. I never found out if the tweet was in
reference to the body of a man or woman (or genderqueer), but that misses the
point. The fact that this story was featured
(or retweeted) over and over on feminist websites, blogs, and Facebook pages
points to the fact that this is a gendered experience.
Moving from this story to hooks’
pedagogy, what do we do? As members of
this Pedagogy course, we are all instructors of the University’s “Introduction
to Human Communication” (or as we so affectionately call it, “COMM 1010”). I would be shocked to learn that someone in
the class has not discussed race at some point.
I would be a little less shocked to find out that someone had not
discussed gender. Moving forward, even
less surprised by a lack of discussion of class. Is this where the discussion
of power structures ends? Should we even talk about body politics? I think hooks would give a resounding “absolutely!” Her interest in not just perspective, but
voice leads to such assertions that “hearing each other’s vices, individual thoughts,
and sometimes associated theses [sic] voices with personal experience makes us
more acutely aware of each other” (p. 186).
So, fellow instructors, I leave you
with this: while I cannot dictate how you run your classroom, nor should I
dismiss your results as failures just because they do not mirror the expected
results of the status quo, I encourage you to expand your horizons. I hope that you are able to see that gendered
discrimination is not limited to explicit performances of male or female, but
rather that intersectionality will always exist. Even if you do not have the option to give
space for marginalized voices, I challenge you to make space.
-C.H.
-C.H.
Such an engaging post. I recall my recent experience in the classroom as my students told me, anonymously of of course, that I talked about race too much. Initially, I thought "such privileged kids... I'll show them" but then I took a step back and talked to a few colleagues and mentors. After careful consideration, I realized that their focus on racial topics caused them to overlook the gendered and class discussions we were engaging in-- how unfair to them and me. I was now forced with a new task to present a true form of intersectional rhetoric to my students. After presenting them more examples of gender, they were able to understand the importance of looking at race and class too. Are we a nation that is so "color-blinded" that all we see is the differences in bodies? My goal now is to present them with challenges to the dominant perception of gender.
ReplyDeleteBut sometimes I wonder... was this a cop-out to please privileged students?
Laura,
DeleteThank you for sharing this story with us. I've run into a similar predicament in the classroom: students have stated that I talk about gender too much. The first time I heard this, I was shocked and a little embarrassed. After much reflection (and discussions in pedagogy!), I have come to the conclusion that teaching from my passion and experience brings credibility into the classroom. I don’t have the time or resources to bring guest speakers into the classroom, therefore I often feel faced with the false choice of either teaching from my experience or teaching straight from the textbook. By using my voice, and inviting the voices of the students (in the form of discussion), I can help give relevance to these discussions and demonstrate how they are more than the rantings of an angry feminist.
-C.H.
For a teacher who is the "other," race and gender are interrelated issues that beg for equal consideration. Having mentioned that, I always wondered whether a male "other" is perceived equally as a female "other." My approach to these issues is a transnational feminist one. It allows me to talk about many issues that relate to cultural differences, race, gender, and ways to bridge the gaps between us, humans everywhere regardless of our differences.
ReplyDeleteNoura,
DeleteI appreciate your question about the male “other” in the classroom. I enjoy your approach to discussing race, gender, cultural differences, etc. Oftentimes in the classroom, I feel almost paralyzed by my own privilege. I have entertained the idea of incorporating my own experiences into the classroom, but I often question how I can open discussion on topics to which I clearly have no experience.
-C.H.