a few notes on feminist language from E. Shuessler Fiorenza

[sophiaserpentia]

I write "wo/men" in this way in order not only to indicate the instability in the meaning of the term but also to signal that when I say wo/men I also mean to include subordinated men. ... My way of writing wo/men seeks to underscore not only the ambiguous character of the term "wo/man or wo/men" but also to retain the expression "wo/men" as a political category. Since this designation is often read as referring to white women only, my unorthodox writing of the term seeks to draw to the attention of readers that those kyriarchal structures which determine wo/men's lives and status also impact the lives and status of men of subordinated race, classes, countries, and religions, albeit in different ways. The expression "wo/men" must therefore be understood as inclusive rather than as an exclusive universalized gender term. Jesus and the Politics of Interpretation, pp. 4-5, footnote.

Whereas in the 1970's feminist theorists used as key analytic categories androcentrism/gender (=male-female dualism) and patriarchy (=the domination of the father/male over women) and distinguished between sex and gender roles, such a dualistic gender approach has been seriously questioned by other feminist theorists who are pointing to the multiplicative structures of domination determining most wo/men's lives. In order to theorize structures of domination in antiquity and the multiplicative intersection of gender, race, class, and ethnicity in modernity I have sought to articulate a social feminist heuristic model that replaces the notion of patriarchy/patriarchalism with the neologism of kyriarchy as a key analytic category. ...

"Kyriarchy" means the domination of the lord, slave master, husband, the elite freeborn educated and propertied man over all wo/men and subaltern men. It is to be distinguished from kyriocentrism, which has the ideological function of naturalizing and legitimating not just gender but all forms of domination. Kyriarchal relations of domination are built on elite gender, race, class, and imperial domination as well as wo/men's dependency, subordination, and obedience -- or wo/men's second-class citizenship. ibid, p. 95

Comments

[ladyelaine.livejournal.com]

As a moderate to liberal white, middle class female, I honestly find the PC movement demeaning. Where we used to acknowledge women's femininity in words like waitress, stewardess, chairwoman, actress, etc., these days women are neutered in their professions. Is it not polite to be female or something? I'm not allowed to be a housewife, I'm a "homemaker."

My husband wonders why I refuse to cut my hair--it's because I refuse to masculinize myself in order to fit societal conceptions of what a competent woman is. I wear long, flowing skirts, thankyouverymuch, not those ridiculous female suits that just make a woman look like a slightly curvy man.

I am woman, hear me putter about the kitchen!

[liminalia.livejournal.com]

The point of changing "waitress" to "server" and such was not originally to demean women or masculinize them, but to point out that noting someone's gender was only done if the worker was a woman. There were "writers" and then "lady writers" as if that somehow impinged on the job and was important to note. It isn't that it's impolite to be female. It's that it's impolite to point out someone's gender (or race, or whatever) if it has nothing to do with the job. See the post S made yesterday about not being able to have one's opinions taken as agenda-neutral and the use of "Black author" vs. the non-use of "white male author".

Calling all police "officers" instead of "policemen and policewomen" and other such formations are not only shorter, they start from the assumption that all police officers (or whatever) will do their jobs in the same way regardless of gender.

Call *yourself* a housewife all you want. I can't imagine anyone complaining or being offended.

[ladyelaine.livejournal.com]

Back when all the language was being changed, though, a lot of it wasn't for convenience--or it didn't seem that way to me. Honestly, it seemed a lot of the time like women preferred to be seen as neuter.

I'm not the weaker sex, but damned if I'll give up being the fairer sex!

[wildgarden.livejournal.com]

What I hear you saying is that you feel you can enjoy your gender traditions, and hold a feminist perspective. I do not experience my feminism as a PC issue. It's very inclusive, full of choices, and is basically about supporting women.

This is an extremely cogent analysis though, no?

It expands certain definitions in a way that furthers understanding.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

I think that perhaps those linguistic changes were something that were more helpful to the last generation than they might be for this. It's worth revisiting the issue. The general rule should be that we promote whatever empowers women, and if the language changes of 20 years ago make women feel invisible, it's time to reconsider them.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

They don't make me feel invisible. I don't feel my gender is relevant to most of what I do all day long - why should it be hammered into everyone's heads that I happen to be female every time I am referred to by profession?