Children's Literature and The Politics of Gender.

ADAM MICKIEWICZ UNIVERSITY IN POZNAŃ

Journal of Gender and Power

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

POZNAŃ 2014

JournalofGenderandPowerisaimedatprovidinganinternationalforumfordiscussingvari‐ous issues and processes of gender construction. It is a scholarly, interdisciplinary journal,which features articles in all fieldsof gender studies, drawingonvariousparadigmsandap‐proaches.Weinvitescholarstosubmitarticlesandreviewsreportingontheoreticalconsidera‐ tionsandempiricalresearch.

JournalofGenderandPowerispublishedbyFacultyofEducationalStudies,AdamMickiewiczUniversity(Poznań–Poland).

EditorialBoard

Editor‐in‐ChiefAgnieszkaGromkowska‐MelosikAdamMickiewiczUniversity,Poland

EditorialAssistantMichałKlichowski

AdamMickiewiczUniversity,Poland

Cecilia Åsberg (Linköping University, Sweden), Zygmunt Bauman (University of Leeds,England),FrancescaBettio(UniversityofSiena,Italy),MaryBlair‐Loy(UniversityofCalifornia,USA),DorisChang(WichitaStateUniversity,USA),MirandaChristou(UniversityofCyprus,Cyprus),LorraineDowler(PennsylvaniaStateUniversity,USA),CatherineDriscoll(UniversityofSydney,Australia),VirgíniaFerreira(UniversityofCoimbra,Portugal),EvaFodor(CentralEuropeanUniversity,Hungary),EleanorGordon(UniversityofGlasgow,Scotland),LawrenceGrossberg(UniversityofNorthCarolinaatChapelHill,USA),AnitaHarris(MonashUniversity,Australia),BeataKowalska(JagiellonianUniversity inCracow,Poland),MichaelA.Messner(University of Southern California, USA), Joanna Pawelczyk (Adam Mickiewicz University,Poland), Adriana Piscitelli (State University of Campinas, Brazil), Lydia Potts (Carl vonOssietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany), Renata Siemieńska (University of Warsaw,Poland),KrystynaSlany(JagiellonianUniversityinCracow,Poland),VappuSunnari(UniversityofOulu,Finland),BogusławŚliwerski(TheMariaGrzegorzewskaAcademyofSpecialEducation&ChristianTheologicalAcademy,Poland),SarahThèbaud(UniversityofCalifornia,USA),IrisvanderTuin(UtrechtUniversity,Netherlands),ValentinaI.Uspenskaya(TverStateUniversity,Russia),DeniseWalsh(UniversityofVirginia,USA),EvaZamojska(AdamMickiewiczUniversity, Poland)

LanguageEditorŁukaszPakuła


StatisticalEditorKrystynaKatulska


PublikacjasfinansowanaprzezWydziałStudiówEdukacyjnychUAM

©Uniwersytetim.AdamaMickiewiczawPoznaniu,WydawnictwoNaukoweUAM,Poznań2014

Wersjapierwotnaczasopisma:drukowana

Redaktortechniczny:ElżbietaRygielska

Opracowaniekomputeroweokładki:K.&S.Szurpit

Naokładce:JohnWilliamWaterhouse,Pandora,1896

ISBN978‐83‐232‐2804‐2ISSN2391‐8187

Contents

Editor’s Preface: Pandora’s box. Gender and Power (AGNIESZKA GROMKOWSKA‐MELOSIK). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

ARTICLES

SVISHAPIRONationalcrisisandthechallengeofeducation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

ZBIGNIEWKWIECIŃSKIEducation towards difference and inclusion. Two types of discourses—topositivepedagogy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

JENNAM.CALTON,MARTINHEESACKER,PAULB.PERRINTheelusivenessofprogressivemasculinity:Genderdifferencesinconcep‐tualizationsofnontraditionalgenderroles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

JAREMADROZDOWICZBlackheroesandheroines incinema.RepresentationsofAfro‐Americanidentitiesinthe“Blaxploitation”movies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

LUCIEJARKOVSKÁChildren’sliteratureandthepoliticsofgender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

ALICJAORTYNECKABirthofcyber‐supermothers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

MELINDAR.PIERSON,DUSTINGOWANDecodingmultisyllabicwords:Structuralanalysisinreadingbygroups. . . 99

ALLAKRASULIAWomenandphilanthropy:TheU.S.experiencethatcouldbetransferredintotheUkrainiancontextofhighereducation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

ANETAJUDZIŃSKAWomanhood—contemporaryparadoxesofequalityandexclusion. . . . . . . . 137

4 Contents

BOOKREVIEWS

BARTŁOMIEJKRUK

Susan A. Speer and Elizabeth Stokoe (eds.), Conversation and gender,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011,pp.344. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

ANNASOKOŁOWSKA

Agnieszka Gromkowska‐Melosik, Edukacja i (nie)równość społecznakobiet.Studiumdynamikidostępu [Education and social (in)equality ofwomen.Astudyofthedynamicsofaccess]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164

Submissions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

Listofreviewersfor2014year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168

Editor’s Preface: Pandora’s box. Gender and Power

ItisourpleasuretopresentthesecondvolumeofJournalofGenderandPowertoyou,withhopethatitwillarouseyourinterest.Notacci‐dentallycanthePandorapaintingbyJohnWilliamWaterhousebefoundonthecoverofthejournal.Thecategoriesofknowledge,culturalgenderand power are leitmotivs running through thewhole painting and de‐terminingitssignificance.Letustakeacloserlookatthepainting.

Night. A blackwood. A beautifulwomanwith a calm expression iskneelingatthefootofthestoneplinth.Agrandbeautifulgoldenboxisstandinginfrontofher.Theglowoftheboxisilluminatingherfaceandthealabastrine skinofhernakedarms.On the right there is a flowingstream, an often‐encountered symbol of the evanescence of life. ThewomanisnooneelsebutmythologicalPandora.Insubsequentinterpre‐tations and rewritings of the myth, the box given to her as a dowrywouldtransformfromasimpleclayvesselintoaboxwhichispresentedasafinepieceofcraftsmanshipbyWaterhouse.Thisboxlooksnothinglike theclaybottledescribedbyHesiod.Pandora isopening thebox inthethickwoodwhichappearstobedensewithmeanings.Thewoodisasymbolofconcentratedandunforeseeabledifficultiesanditisarecur‐ringtoposinfairytales.However,thereisnothingdisturbingaboutthewoodinthepainting.ThestreamflowingnexttoPandoraandbluelightscomingfromthedistanceareshowingthatthebrightdayisnearbyandthat regular life is going on. Pandora has not lost herway. Just a fewstepsaway, thewoodends.Shecanbeseenat themomentofopeningthe lid of the box. The time has stopped and nothing augurs the ap‐proachingmisfortune.However, thosewho are familiarwith themythknowthatalltheevilsoftheworldareabouttoescape.Pandora,similar‐ly tobiblicalEve, symbolizes thebetrayalofone’swilland trespassingagainstthebanwhichresultsintheendofcalmandhappiness.Mytho‐logicalPandoraisthefirstwomancreatedbyZeusoutofearthandfire.

6 Editor’s Preface

Shewassenttotheworldfullofharmonyandhomogeneitywhichwaspopulated solely bymen. Nevertheless, the Pandoramyth can be alsointerpretedinadifferentway,especiallyinthecontextofthepaintingbyWaterhouse.HisPandoraseemstobeopeningaboxfullofknowledge,prompted by curiosity. This knowledge is tantamount to different dis‐courseswhich introduce anxiety and chaos into the one‐sided and or‐dered world. The world based on simple and binary schemes. Eventhough this knowledge brings anxiety and is frequently unwanted, itallowsforshowingdiversityandcomplexityofrealitywhilenotneces‐saryfacilitatingitsunderstanding.Pandora’sboxsymbolizesknowledge.Itcanbetheknowledgeabout‘awoman’,butalsoabout‘aman’whichisnotalwaysutteredbyafemalevoiceinthediscourseoffemininity.Pan‐doraisalsoasymbolofunconstrainedwoman’spower.

ThebeautifulPandoraisledbyemotions—curiosityanddesire—butat thesametimesheactsvery logically:shemakesachoice,openstheboxwhichwasgiventoherasadowry.Isitpossibletoimaginesomeonewho would not open it? This curiosity is dangerous but life‐giving innature—itgivesrisetocomprehensionandtransgression(whatismore,if Pandora had not opened the box, then who would remember hera thousand years later?). The content of the boxwould always changeaccording to the wishes of the authors of the myth’s subsequent ver‐sions.However,anxietiesandhopehavealwaysremainedonthebottomofthebox.Theopeningoftheboxisanactof losingcontroloverwhatwillhappen,whilethelockedboxusedtogiveafeelingofstabilityandsafety.

Severaldecadesago,Americanfeministsstartedtoclaimthathistoryhadbeenwrittenbymen,aboutmenandformen.Asaresult,theybe‐lieved that the English word ‘history’ is nothing more but ‘his story’.Thus, they put forward an idea of writing history by women, aboutwomenandforwomen—her‐story.

Thismight be the casewith themyth about Pandorawhich so farcould have been rewritten and reinterpreted by men. But how aboutreadingitdifferently?

Theopeningoftheboxcansymbolizenewbreakthroughsinscienceandsociallife,whichinitiallymightappeartobedisastrousandappeartoquestionthesocialorderinadestructiveway.However,suchbreak‐throughsvianumerous transgressionsand(re)interpretationscangiverisetodifferentemancipatingdiscoursesofknowledgeandpower.Whoknows,maybeafteropening theboxoneof the thoughtsbornoutof it

Editor’s Preface 7

led to the idea thateventhough femininityandmasculinityarealwaysinherentlybiological,theycangiverisetoanumberofsocialconstructs.Culturalgender,whichisstillconsideredbymanyasaplagueandmis‐fortune,forothersopensthedoortofreedom,equalrightsandempow‐erment.What seemed to be a disorder or even amisfortune from theperspectiveofoldstereotypesistransformingintoitsopposite,namely,intotheabilityofdefiningawomanandamanandtheabilityofexpress‐ingthefreedomtocreatingone’sbiography.Undoubtedly,thisinterpre‐tationofthePandoramythismuchclosertotheintentionoftheauthors.In the gender discourse we are often presented with the knowledgewhichisdifficult,ambiguousandpronetomultipleinterpretations.Thisknowledgeisinextricablyconnectedwithpower,especiallythepowerofunderstanding.Thus, the curiosity of researcherswho frequently openthe proverbial ‘Pandora’s box’ leads to pluralism of discourses and totransgression. The knowledge offered in themyth about Pandora andPandoraherselfarecontradictory,ambiguousandincoherent.Weneedtobear inmind thatPandora literallymeans ‘the all‐gifted’ or ‘the all‐giving’.ShewasendowedwithbeautyandsensualitybyVenus,andwiththegiftofintelligence,eloquenceandthepowerofseductionwithwordsbyMercury.Enjoythereadinganddonothesitatetopublishyourarti‐clesinthenextvolume.

AgnieszkaGromkowska‐MelosikEditor‐in‐Chief


ARTICLES


Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

SviShapiroUniversity of North Carolina at Greensboro (USA)

National crisis and the challenge of education*

ABSTRACT.ThemainobjectiveofthisarticleisshowingthatinUSAisacrisisofmeaningandvalues—onethat leadstoadebasementofhumanrelationships,acceleratingmaterialismandgreed, andmisplaced fixationon celebrity andglamour. In this context there is a compellingneedtoarticulateanewbottomlineforeducation—onethatoffersadifferentvisionforedu‐cating our children that directly and cogently speaks to human purpose andmeaning in theworldthatthattheywillinherit.InthisarticleItrytodescribethatnewvisionofeducation—thepedagogyofpeace.

KEYWORDS:crisisofeducation,pedagogyofpeace,educationintheUnitedStates

ThereismuchtalktodayintheUnitedStatesaboutacrisisofeduca‐tion.Yetwhatispointedtoasthecauseofthiscrisisisconfusingatbest,andmisleading atworst. There is, for example, the argument that oureconomy is in troublebecauseofpooreducation.Ofcourse this seemspreposterous when compared to the role of the banks in our currenteconomic crisis. Irresponsibility and short‐term considerations, lack ofgovernmentalregulation,andacultureofgreedseemtobemuchmoresalientthaneducationmightbetothissituation.Despitetalkofdemandsforsophisticatedskillsandmoreeducatedworkers,predictionsareforaneconomythatwillcontinuetoemployhighnumbersoflowandsemi‐skilledworkers.Jobsthatusedtobedonebyhighschoolgraduatesarenowincreasinglyfilledbythosewithcollegedegrees.Elsewherethereismuchtalkaboutaneducationalcrisisthatistheresultofkidsperform‐ing poorly in comparisonwith students from other countries This hasresulted in the calamity of an education system more and more en‐thralledtoacultureoftestingwhichhassappedimagination,creativity,________________

*Thisessaydrawsontheauthor’sintroductiontohisbookEducationandHopeinTroubledTimes:VisionsofChangeforOurChildren’sWorld(NewYork:Routledge,2010).

12 SVI SHAPIRO

curiosityandcritical intelligence fromourclassrooms.Thecrisisofac‐countabilityhasbecomethespringboardforrigidandmechanicalformsofcontrolovertheteachingprocessinourschools.

Yet in all of this talk of crisis there is little that speaks to the pro‐foundmoral and spiritual responsibility that is carried—or should becarried,byeducation.Beyondtheusual focusofschooling(grades, testresults,graduationratesetc.) issurelysomethingof fargreatersignifi‐cance. Education has the capability and the obligation, I believe, ofspeakingtotheveryissueofwhatitmeanstobehuman;ofhowweashumanbeingsliveandrelatetooneanother;andhowwerelateto,andcarefor,thenaturalworldthatwesharewithalllifeforms.Todaytheseissuesrise to thevery topofwhat is important toourverysurvivalasaspecies.Forus,andevenmoreforourchildren,whatneedstoconcernusistheveryqualityofhumanlifeonourplanet.Andcentraltothisisthe continuingproblemof violent conflict and violent behavior amonghumanbeings.

Ina letterof invitationwrittentothecontributorsofarecentbookI wrote that its purposewas to help articulate a new vision and pur‐pose—andbegintosetanalternativedirection—forourchildren’sedu‐cationatatimewhen,asIbelieve,thereisanincreasingdelegitimationof the prevailing assumptions and orthodoxies that have shaped ourpubliclifeoverthepastfewyears.Therewas,inaddition,adeephungerforthearticulationofwhatMichaelLerner(2006)hascalled,anewbot‐tom line for education—one that focusesonour children’s lives ashu‐manbeingswhowillassumetheethical,politicalandsocialresponsibili‐tiesofoursharednationalandglobalcommunities.

IdonotthinkIambeingoverlyoptimistictobelievethatwearenowwitnessing the implosion of the neo‐conservative ‘revolution’ in theUnited States. All signs point to our being in a transitional period inwhichtheassumptionsthathavegovernedpolitical life inrecentyearsareingravecrisis.AtthecoreoftheseassumptionshasbeenthebeliefthattheUnitedStateshadafreeandunopposedhandtomakeandreor‐ganizetheworldaccordingtotheinterestsandinclinationsofourgov‐erningelites.Wecannowseequiteclearlythatthisarroganceofpowerhashitaresistantwall.Theworldcannotbere‐madethroughourmili‐tary muscle and economic power quite as easily as some may havewished. The lies and deceit that have brought us to this catastrophicmomenthavebeenlaidbare.Thebeliefthatthiscountrycouldactuni‐laterallyontheworldstagewithoutmuchbroaderinternationalsupport

National crisis and the challenge of education 13

has produced unparalleled anger and distrust towards the U.S. Manynowsee that terrorism isonlyoneofanumberof serious threats thatconfront us; global warming, lethal epidemics, poverty, violence andwar,nuclearproliferation,racism,genderoppressionandethnichatred.Allarepartoftheincreasinglypressingagendaforactionintheworld.Andtheseverityandcomplexityofhumanproblemswilldemandfromus,andespeciallyourchildren,inclinations,dispositions,andknowledgequite different from those which have shaped, and continue to shape,our social identities and ideological outlooks, moral preferences andattitudinalpriorities.Thisisatimeofcrisis,butalsoofrenewedpossibil‐ity—onethatoffersustheopportunitytoradicallyreconsiderwhatisthemeaningofeducation forageneration thatwillbear thebruntofgrap‐plingwiththeseextraordinarychallengesanddangers.Whatwillitmeanto be an educated humanbeing in the 21st century compelled to con‐frontandaddresssomuchthatthreatenstheverybasisofadecentandhopefulhumanexistence?

Theunravelingofthisconsensus is likelytobring in itstrainmanyquestionsaboutourpublicpolicypriorities.Alreadythere isagrowingpopulist resentment towards the increasing concentrationofwealth intheUS.Thereisincreasingdisillusionmentwiththeeffectsoffreetradeagreements on the lives andeconomic security ofworking andmiddleclass Americans which includes the anxiety felt by many towards theinflux of migrants from these free trade areas. For many Americansthereisaninabilitytomeetthebasicsofadecentexistencethroughtheabsence of affordable health care or dependable retirement income.HurricaneKatrinaexposedustotheharshrealitiesofpovertyandrac‐ism that continue todisfigureAmerican life.Catastrophicweatherpat‐terns have ignited concerns about humanly influenced climate change.Continuingwar is resulting in increasing disillusionmentwith govern‐ment’sfailuretorespondtoourdependenceonoilandthedevelopmentofalternativeenergysources.Atthesametimearightwingauthoritari‐anChristianityhas ledthenationdownapathof intolerance,discrimi‐nation and religious chauvinism. Its constricted moral rage has beenblindtoquestionsofpoverty,socialinjusticeandenvironmentaldegra‐dation.Meanwhilethereisanincreasinglypervasivesensethatthereisacrisisofmeaningandvalues inAmerica—onethat leadstoadebase‐ment of human relationships, acceleratingmaterialism and greed, andmisplaced fixation on celebrity and glamour. In this context there isacompellingneedtoarticulateanewbottomlineforeducation—onethat

14 SVI SHAPIRO

offers a different vision for educating our children that directly and co‐gentlyspeakstohumanpurposeandmeaningintheworldthatthattheywillinherit.

The no child left behind debacle

Ofcourseanysuchattemptwillneedtostartwiththefailuresofre‐centnationaleducationreformswiththeirdeleteriouseffectonschoolsintheUnitedStates.Thesehavebeenwelldocumentedbyresearchersandincludethefailuretosignificantlyreducetheracialachievementgap;thepenalizing of immigrant children and special needs students; increaseddrop‐out rates; thenarrowingof the curriculumand the shallow reduc‐tionistformoflearning;theincreasedstressandanxietyamongstudentsresultingfromtheobsessivefocusonstandardizedtests;thediversionofpublic funds to private tutoring sources and for‐profit schools; the de‐skilling of teacherswork and the delegitimation of the teaching profes‐sion.Allofthispointstoabankruptcyofpublicpolicyineducation.Andasthe failures and unpopularity of these reforms gather steam there areincreasingcallstotethereducationevenmorecloselytothehumancapi‐taldemandsofbigbusiness,aswelltointensifythemeasurementsofac‐countabilityinpublicschools(andinhighereducation).Littleisheardinthe public discourse about education’s responsibility to nurturing theknowledge,attitudesanddispositionsofademocraticpolity.Shortshriftisgiventothevalueofdevelopingtheimaginationandcreativeaptitudesoftheyoung.Thereislittleattentionaffordedtothecapacityofeducationto enhance the ability of young people to critically interrogate popularmediaorthesourcesofpublicinformation.Intellectualandcreativeactivi‐tyasajoyfulhumanact,notsimplyavehicleforinstrumentaladvantage,comestoberegardedasfrivolouswaste.Anditistakenasaxiomaticthatthemoralcontextoftheclassroomandschoolisonethatemphasizesin‐dividualachievement,competitiveadvantage,andwillingnesstosubordi‐nateauthenticinterestsandpassionstothecompulsivequestforcollegeandcareersuccess.It isfullyunderstandablethatparentsareconcernedaboutthecapacityoftheirchildrentoachievebasicliteracyandnumera‐cy. These skills are, after all, fundamental to the ability to negotiate themodernworld.Yettheemphasisonthesetotheexclusionofallelsepro‐duces a sadly limited formof educationdevoid of any larger humanvi‐sion—onethatspeakstothequestforlivesofmeaningandpurpose.Sep‐


aratedfromthelatterandfocusingonlyonthetransmissionofskillsandtechnicalcompetenciestheclassroomquicklybecomesasiteofboredom,stifledcuriosity,andjoylesslearning.

Yet,asIhavesuggestedabove,thegrowingpoliticalcrisisholdsoutthepossibilityofchangeandhope.TheRepublicanPartyhasexhausteditsarmoryofchauvinisticaggressionanditsagendaofhatefulmoralismanddemonization.TheDemocratshavefailed,sofar,toarticulateacou‐rageous path of political, ethical and social renewal for our nationalcommunity.Thisisamomentofuncertaintybutalsoopportunitytore‐shapethepubliclanguageofeducation.Thereistheopportunitytopar‐ticipate inthearticulationofasharedvisionofwhat itshouldmeantoeducate a new generationwhowill have to contendwith increasinglyperilous social circumstances, but also extraordinary possibilities fortransformingourworld intoone that is social just, compassionate andenvironmentally responsible. Inmanyways, asmy long timecolleagueand collaboratorDavid Purpel (2004) has argued, there are no educa‐tionalproblems,onlysocial issuesthatgetplayedoutontheterrainofeducation. The magnitude of the human and ecological crisis we con‐frontdemandsmorethantheoftenarcaneandego‐inflatingexegesisofacademic discourse. Canwe really doubt that our situation today callsfor a language andvision that is bold, courageous and resonant to thefears,concernsandhopesofthebroadmajorityofhumanbeings.

Education and the crisis of democracy

Inmyownwritings(seeforexampleShapiro,2006)Ihavetriedtode‐scribethecontoursofsuchavisionandtheeducationalagendathatcanbedrawnfromit.Thereissurelylittledoubtthatwefaceadeepcrisisofmeaningful citizenship in this country.And in this regard educationhasabdicated its responsibilities. Indeed schooling contributes in importantwaystotheeviscerationofciviccultureandtheerosionofidentitiesthatarecapableofseriouslyenactingdemocraticcitizenship.Meaningfulciti‐zenship—whatStuartEwan (1988) refers to as a ‘democracyof expres‐sion’ ismore andmore replaced bywhat he calls a ‘democracy of con‐sumption’.Formanypeople—youngpeopleespecially,choice,power,andfreedom are increasingly reduced to ones capacity to buy. Themarket‐place defines ‘democratic’ actionmore than the polling booth or publicengagement and advocacy. The credit card defines one’s eligibility as

16 SVI SHAPIRO

acitizen.Thatcriticalaspectofdemocracy—thecapacitytoexertpoweroverone’scircumstancesisreducedtotheabilitytoshopfromtheever‐expanding,dizzyingarrayofavailableproducts.Advertisershaveappro‐priatedthelanguageofdemocraticlifesothatchange,innovation,renewal,andtheenergyofpubliclifeareconcentratedanddistilledintotheexcite‐mentoffashion,automobileownership,thelatestupgradeinthetechnologyofcommunication,orthepromiseofoptimalexperiencesofferedthroughtravel,drinkorsex.Thequestionofhowmuchfulfillmentormeaningisultimatelyavailable fromthiscultureofconsumptionanditspreoccupa‐tionwithglamour, fame,andmoney, iscertainlysomethingwemustre‐turntobelow.WhatisclearishowfarthisfocusisfromEwan’sdemocracyofexpression.IfdemocracyisaboutasharedsearchforbettersocietythenconsumingisallaboutwhatIhaveacquiredorexperienced.Ifdemocracyisabout improving our common wellbeing then consumption relentlesslyofferstheprospectof‘gettinganedge’andbeingone‐uponourneighborinlooks,acquisitions,opportunities,andstyle.Apossessiveandcompeti‐tive individualism is at its motivational core. In sharp contrast to thisademocracyofexpressionconcernsthecapacitytonameandarticulatethecircumstances thatenableor limita fullandsatisfyinghumanexistence,notjustforoneselfbutforallofuswhoaremembersofoursharedpolity.

Yetitisararitywhenschoolingoffersstudentstheopportunitytode‐velopthatcapacityforexpressionthatenhancesdemocraticlifeandciti‐zenship.Schoolformoststudentsisprimarilyabouttheprocessofdomes‐tication and conformity as they learn the grammar and syntax of test‐takingskillsandbecomeadeptatthesearchforthesinglecorrectansweronthetestsheet.Creativethought,criticalquestioning,thearticulationofideasand insightsaboutstudents’ livesandconcernshave littleplace intheclassroomsofmostyoungpeople.Thesuffocatingregimesofeduca‐tional reformssqueezeout anypossibilityof educatingyoungpeople sothattheydevelopgenuinecuriosityabouttheirworld,apassiontopursueandunderstand life’s purpose, and thewill to challenge accepted truthsand conventions. Most of all schools now develop accountants of testscores and grade point averages, and adeptmanipulators of college re‐sumesthroughtheaccumulationofcurricularandextra‐curricularexpe‐riences.Littleherecancontributetoamindthatisalertandawaketothechallengeswefaceasahumancommunity,andisimbuedwiththedesireto question deeply and boldly those social, moral and epistemologicalassumptionsandcategoriesthatshapeourdangerouslydivisive,wasteful,andmaterialisticworld.AfterAbuGhraibandtheabusesofGuantanamo


andelsewherewemustbeconcernedagainwiththepropensitytowardsanunthinkingconformity—areadinesstodoorsaywhateverisdeemednecessary inorder tooblige those in authority.Asweknowsowell thepath towards what Hannah Arendt called so aptly the ‘banality of evil’startsinschoolwiththemessageaboutdoingwhatoneistoldtodowith‐out question or reflection.When success in school comes tomean rotememorization,thesearchforthesinglerightanswer,andintellectualcon‐formityortimidity,thenwehavecreatedtheconditionsinwhichhumanbeingslearnthatitisrighttoabdicatetheircapacityformoralautonomyand‘wide‐awake’thoughtfulnessanddecisionmaking.

Theshrinkingabilitytoseeknowledgeashavinganytransformativepowerotherthanasthecrassinstrumentofindividualadvantageisalsotheconsequenceoftheworldofspinthatengulfspoliticalandcorporatelife in theUnitedStates.This isapointwellmadebyBernardCooper‐man(2007)forwhomourcultureisonethatinducescynical,disbeliev‐ingattitudestowardsanyclaimsabouttruthorjudgment.Whetheritisabout the deleterious effects of tobacco or the crisis around climatechangesomeonecanalwaysbefound(backedupofcoursebypowerfulvestedinterests)torefutewhateverclaimsaremade.Peoplearetaught,firstandforemost,toseethemselvesasconsumerswhochoosesidesasa matter of temporary and shifting taste or convenience. Intellectualconvictionandethicalcommitmentarereplacedbycant,spinandshort‐terminterests.Andthis,saysCooperman,isreflectedinourclassroomswherestudentshave lost theability to thinkcriticallyabout theworldbecausetheydonotbelieveinknowledgeitself.Thesedifficultieshow‐evershould,ofcourse,onlystrengthenourconvictionastotheneedtounderstandeducation’scrucialroleinrevitalizingademocraticculture.In the face of the extraordinary and intensifying power of elites—corporate,political,military,tostructurethelanguageandsetthelimitsofpublicdebate in thiscountry,anysignificantneweducationalvisionmust be one that includes theprospect of a critically reflective, boldlyquestioning,andimaginativelycreativecitizenry.

Education and the struggle for community

Thecrisisofdemocraticcitizenship isalso thecrisisofcommunity.Thewithering ofwhat CornelWest (2004) refers to asparrhesia—thecapacity forboldand courageous thinking, is also theerosionof social

18 SVI SHAPIRO

cohesionandcommunalinterdependence.Andineachcaseschoolsareanimportant(thoughcertainlynotthesole)factorinthisdecline.Schoolisafterallthatplacewherechildrenfirstlearnthe‘cultureofseparateddesks’.Itistheplacewheretheyarefirstformallyintroducedtoaworld‐view in which life’s rewards—material and symbolic, are seen as theproductofanendlessstrugglewithone’sneighbors.Thementalityofthebell‐curve instructs them that scarcity of affirmation, recognition andrewardispartoftheveryDNAofhumanexistence.Itisasocialimpera‐tive, they learn, to acquire those skills, manners, dispositions andknowledgethatgivethemanadvantageoverthenextindividual.What‐ever is said about friendship, sharing and caring in our schools andclassrooms,therealeffectofthecurriculumistoteachthecentralityofcompetitionandindividualisminoursocialrelations.Inthisworld,chil‐drenlearn,noteveryonecanbesomeone;someofusareinevitablydes‐tinedforfailureandinvisibility.Tobe‘somebody’restonthecapacitytoclassifyanotherasbeing‘no‐body’.Itisalessonrelentlesslyemphasizedthrough schools’ constant attention to themarkersof success and fail‐ure,validationandrejection.Itisamessagethatdeeplypenetratesstu‐dents’ understanding of human existence. The world is a predatoryplace.The fearof failurehangsoverallofusandwith itadistrustandsuspiciontowardsthosewhoappeartohaveacquiredsomethingmorethanwehave.It isaworldinwhichenvy,dissatisfaction,andaninces‐santdrive towards invidiouscomparisonpermeateour lives.Fromthegold stars of kindergarten to the status hierarchy of college selectionschoolingisaninsistentsocializationintotheworldofhierarchy,statusand human separation.We are, through this process, driven apart nottogether; led to see ourselves as working against one another ratherthan acting cooperatively; andprimed for an aggressive egoism ratherthananopen‐heartedgenerosity.

Thosewhowouldarguethattherootemotionofourcompetitively‐driven, aggressively self‐oriented culture is fearmake a convincing ar‐gument.Thereistheanxietythatwhatwehavemustconstantlybepro‐tectedfromthosewhojealouslydesiretotakeitfromus,resentourhardwongains,orwishtodiminishoursuccessinsomeway.Suchpervasiveresentiment produceswhatBarbaraEhrenreich (1990) refers toas theconstant ‘fear of falling’; the sense that in a ferociously competitiveworldsomeoneisalwaysjustbehindyouontheladderwaiting(hoping)youwillslip.Theencirclingarmsofyoungchildrenastheyprotecttheirassignmentfromtheeyesofotherchildrensoaptlyembodiestheworld


viewof a fearful and suspicious individualism.Their answersdarenotbesharedwithotherchildrenforthatwoulddiminishtheirspecialclaimtosuccessandrecognition.Forthosewhosearmsandhandsareusedtohidewhattheyknowisaninadequateresponse,thebodylanguageman‐ifests the shame and vulnerability of failure in that painful world inwhichworthisalwayscontingentonsuccessandachievement.

Inthislandscapeofpainfulhumanfragmentationandseparationthehunger for connection, genuine friendship, closeness and camaraderiefindexpression—butofteninwaysthatstillbearthemarksofahostileand fearfulenvironment.Ourpreoccupationwith the flagandthemili‐tary speaks to a desperate desire for some unifying focus of a sharedcommunity.Sadlysucha focus invariablybecomesa fetish that carriestheinsistenceonpatrioticconformity.Itcomesquicklytostandforthatnationalisticsenseoftogethernesswhichleaveslittleroomfordissent.Itis a community inwhich thepriceofmembership is anunquestioningallegiancetogovernmentalauthorityorthebeliefintheperennialright‐nessofone’scause.Notsurprisinglysuchpatrioticbelonging isunder‐pinnedbytriumphalismandanuncriticalcelebrationofalwaysbeingontherightsideofhistory.ThissenseofconnectionwithothersismarkedtoobyaManicheanviewof theworld inwhichtheties thatbindustosome, situate others as our inveterate enemies. We are locked intoa constant struggle between ourselves‐the forces of light, and otherswho represent the side of evil. It is hardly surprising that this kind ofpatriotismseemsalwaystofind,orconstruct,athreateningforceintheworldwhichwearerequiredtoopposewithauniformityofideologicalandpolitical support.Theconstructionof communityhere is rooted inazero‐sumworldofenemies;connectionamongusispredicatedbyourhostilitytowards,andfearof,thosewhoappeartothreatenourwayoflife. It is easy to seehowyoungpeople are socialized into this kindofworld‐view.The schoolpep rally andvarsity athletics rivalry inculcateafrenziedsupportforone’sownteam.Prideandloyaltytowardsone’s‘own’sidecometogetherwithademonizingoftheopposition.Thecele‐brationofoursharedidentityisalwaysonesideofacoinwhoseotherfaceisfiercecompetitionandthewilltosuperiorityordominance.Thepoisonof a community constructed through invidious comparison with otherswhoareviewedasinferior,immoralorbentonourdestructionhasverydeeprootsinourculture.Wedonothavetolookfartoseeapoliticsbuiltaroundthecontrastbetweenthoseof ‘us’whoinhabitthenormal,safeandhygienicworldofheterosexualityandthosewhoappeartothreaten

20 SVI SHAPIRO

itsacceptance.Ourworld isrivenbyreligiousclaimsas towhospeakswiththeoneandonlytruevoiceofGodandthosewhoarehereticalpre‐tenders. Migrants from other countries seeking a better life for them‐selvesandtheirfamiliesaremadetoappearasadangerousthreattothenationalcultureandlanguage.Modernitywithitsdrivetowardsunceasingchange, dislocation and uncertainty produces a world of extraordinaryalienationandanxiety.Unprecedentedmovementsofpeopleacrossbor‐ders,disruptionofsettledwaysoflifethroughthecultural‘invasion’ofTV,movies,andtheinternet,andeconomicupheavalscausedbyrapidtechno‐logicalinnovationandglobalmovementsofcapitalandfinancealladdtothetransitorinessandfluxofeverydaylife.Itcanhardlybesurprisingthatsuch conditions are a catalyst for attempts to forge stable identitiesaroundwhat ZygmuntBauman (1997) calls ‘neo‐tribalism’. Such identi‐tiesareoftenones thatare turned inon themselves—absolutist in theirthinking,resistanttoanyoutsideinfluences,andrigidlyhierarchical(usu‐allyaggressivelypatriarchal).Thesecommunitiesofresistancetothede‐stabilizingeffectsofmodernityandglobalizedcapitalismprovideasenseofconnectionandmeaninginanatomizedanddisruptedworld.

Fierce assertion of communal identity reflects also a spiritual andphysical resistance by those whose ethnicity, gender, religious tradi‐tions, and national identity have been degraded, repressed and sub‐merged. These allegiances are formed from the pain and humiliationdealt to oppressed groups. Such communities are both political andtherapeuticattemptingtoassuagethewoundsofhumiliation,invisibilityandmarginality while demanding redress to the social injustices theyhave had to constantly endure. Such communities frequently demandschools of their own where the pride of heritage and identity can betransmittedtoayoungergeneration.Weseethisinschoolsthatempha‐size an Afrocentric curriculum, Jewish day schools, schools for Indianandotherindigenousgroups,inMuslimschools,thegenderspecificed‐ucationofwomen, and in somekindsofChristian schools.There is anunderstandablewishamongcommunitieswhosehistoryhasbeenoneofexclusion andoppression toprovide for their young an education thatreverses the pattern of marginality, humiliation and invisibility. Sucheducationalgoalsareintegraltoavisionofaculturallydiversedemocra‐cy.Yet there is a tensionhere that shouldnotbe ignoredbetweende‐mocracy’spromiseoftheaffirmationofpluralcultural,ethnic,andreli‐giouscommunities,andtheneedtoensureauniversalhumanethicandaglobalcivicculture.


Theenormouschallengeinthe21stcenturyistoallowandfacilitatethe genuine recognition and flourishing of all those communities thathavehithertobeenmadeinvisiblebytheexerciseofhegemonicculturesand,atthesametime,toensurethatfierceallegiancewithinthesecom‐munitiesdoesnotprecludeasenseofwiderhumanconnectionandin‐terdependence. It is Ibelieve the taskofeducation toboth facilitate theformerwhilealsoencouragingthe latter.Thismeansthateducationhasadouble role around the issueof community. Schoolsneed toprovidethespaceinwhichparticularisticidentitiescanbenurtured.Theyneedalsotobuildandencouragecommunitiesofamuchwiderspaninwhichauniversalhumanethicandconsciousnessflourishes.Itissurelyneces‐sary toassertasneverbefore theconnectednessof thehumanspecies(and of course the interdependence on earth of all life). We face asahumancommunitythreatstoourveryexistenceasaspeciesfrompol‐lution,climatechange,watershortages,nucleararmaments,thespreadofdiseaseacrossnationalborders,andviolence thatmakesnodistinc‐tionbetweencombatantsandinnocentcivilians.Educationwillhavetobe a part of a process that asserts and supports identities that area complexweave of theparticular and theuniversal, the local and theglobal,thepartialandthewhole.Weknowenoughnowaboutthemean‐ingofidentitytounderstandtheimportanceofrootednessandplacetohumanwellbeing.Butwealsoare increasinglyawareof themalignantand dangerous consequences to others when such identity refuses toacknowledgethebondsthatconnectallofourspeciesassocial,ethical,and spiritual beings. Citizenship education today must be one that isconcernedwithourplural identitiesand the social cohesion stemmingfromourcommonconcernsandneedsashumanbeings(Maalouf,2000).

Schooling and global justice

Ofcourse it is impossible toaddress thepressingquestionof com‐munityinourlivesifwedonotacknowledgeitsinseparabilityfromis‐suesofsocialjustice.Communityisafterallthatmodeofbeinginwhicheachofusisvisibleandrecognizedwithinthecircleofhumanpresence.Eachofustakesourplacewithinthiscircleasapresenceofinestimablevalue, equally empowered and responsible forwhat is collectively un‐dertaken,andfullysupportedandsecureinthecareofonesneighbors.The evidence points to a deep hunger for community among human

22 SVI SHAPIRO

beingsyetthepracticesandrealityofourdailylivesconstantlycontra‐dictsitspossibility.Weareinschoolandelsewhereconstantlysubjectedtoaprocessthatcreatesaworldofwinnersandlosers—ahierarchyofworthandrecognitioninwhich,asJohnHoltoncenoted,afewlearntogetwhattheylike,andmanylearntolikewhattheyget.Schoolis,inthewordsofeducationalhistorianJoelSpring, firstandforemosta ‘sortingmachine’thatsocializestheyoungintoaworldofinequality.Theprima‐ry andmost insidious lesson of education is the legitimacy of unequaltreatment and differential human value. School is nothing if it is nota vehicle for the transmission of hierarchical distinctions of respect,worth, ability and economic expectations. It is the seeding ground forasocietyinwhichweacceptastonishinginequalitiesinthecircumstanc‐es of our lives—access to health care, decent housing, availability offood,opportunitiesforrestandrecreation,securityofemployment,dig‐nityandrespectinthecommunityandonthejob.Ofcoursesuchhierar‐chical ordering stands in sharp contrast to our vision and desire foracommunitythatissomethingmorethantheclichésofaHallmarkcard.Theclassroom itself, aswehavealreadynoted, is aplace inwhich theethicofmutualcaringandsupportisundonebytherelentlessprocessofcompetitive‐individualisminwhichstudentslearnandareurged‘togetahead’ofoneanother.And talkof anational community ismockedbytheextraordinarydifferencesinchildren’slivesconsequentupondiffer‐encesofrace,wealthandgender.Alltalkof‘nochildleftbehind’ispureobfuscation in a society where social and economic inequalities beardownheavilyonchildren’sliveshopelesslyblightingthepossibilitiesforsuccess or achievement among somany.And talkof a sharednationalinterestismuchofthetimeacoverforglaringandincreasinginequali‐ties in the livesof citizens.HurricaneKatrinaprovidedawindowontothe horrifying world of racial and class discrimination in the UnitedStateswhere the livesof thousandsofpoorandworking class citizensweresubjectedtoacallousdisregardbytheirgovernmentatanhourofoverwhelmingneed.

In thewiderworld thenewglobaleconomicorderhasbeenapre‐scriptionforincreasinginequalitiesintheshapeofpeople’slives.Nearly3 billion people on the planet live on less than two dollars a day;850millionpeoplegohungryand,accordingtoUNestimates,20–30,000childrendie everydayof starvationorpreventablediseases related tomalnutrition. More and more power accrues to gigantic transnationalbusinessesthatundermineanynotionofademocraticpolitywhereor‐


dinarypeoplehavearealsayaboutthekindofworldinwhichtheylive.Talkofcommunitywhensuchextraordinarydisparitiesexistinthedis‐tributionofwealthandintheexerciseofpowerbecomesemptiedofanyrealmeaning. In aworld inwhich elites have such a disproportionatecapacity to influence our culture, economic well being, social policyaroundmatterlikeeducationandhealthcare,andhowwedealwithourenvironment,thegeneralinterestofthemanyissupplantedbythegreedandself‐aggrandizementofthefew.Whencommunityisunderstoodasoneofsharedsocialandeconomicconcerns,mutualhumanrespect,andthepursuitofourcommonwellbeingthenthepresentcourseofnationaland international development belies any such vision. Our nation andourworld are suffusedwith the images of environmental toxicity anddegradation that fall hardeston thepoorest amongus.The securityofworkingpeopleisundercutbythecallousandindiscriminatesearchformore profits. The underdeveloped places of our planet are ruthlesslyplunderedandexploitedbythosewithpoliticalandmilitarypower.Mil‐lionsdiefromthelackofmedicineswithheldbecauseofthegreedofthedrug industry.And thousandsof youngwomenare the exploited com‐moditiesofsexual‘tourism.’Aneducationthatistonurturethesenseofhuman connectedness within both our nation and within the largerglobalhumanfamilyisanimperativeofourtime.It istheonlyalterna‐tive toaworldof increasingandunnecessarysuffering,morecataclys‐micwarandviolence,andlivesnotblightedbyadehumanizedexistenceinwhichpeoplearetreatedasthrowawayandexpendableitemsoflittleenduringvalue.

To educate towards the nowpressing vision of human communitycannotbeseparatedfromtheneedtomovehumanconsciousnessawayfromtheimpulsetosort,select,andrank,andtofindandtolegitimatewinnersandlosers.Inourschoolsthiswillbenoeasytasksinceeduca‐tion is almost unimaginable today when it not about such a process.Yet we need to be reminded that, despite the power and influence ofsuch ideas, other ethical, political and spiritual visions persist. Thesevisions speak to the continuing possibility of aworld inwhich all areaffirmed in theirworth, respectandautonomy; inwhichalldeserve tolivewithdecencyandsecurity;andinwhichmeaningisfoundthroughthe sharing of our earthly resources. Such a visionmust surely infusewhatRaymondWilliamsoncereferredtoasthelongrevolutionthatwearecalledupontomakeboth inourschoolsandthroughoutoursocialinstitutions.

24 SVI SHAPIRO

Towards a pedagogy of peace

Allofthisrestsonthebeliefinauniversalhumanethic.Itisanethicrootedintheconceptoftheinfinitevalueandpreciousnessofeachandeveryhumanlife.Itsfirstimperativeistorefuseviolenceagainstothers.Wecannotseparateavisionofeducationcenteredonthequestforde‐mocracy, communityand social justice from theneed for aneducationthatnegatestheviolencethatpervadesourculture.Thethirdgreatre‐sponsibilityofeducation today is tocultivateacultureofpeace.But inthe end this goal cannot be separated from the need to cultivate thebondsofuniversalhumancommunityandacultureofdemocracy.Thefirst challenge of educating for peace is overcoming the dualistic andManicheanthinkingthatshapessomuchofhumanconsciousnessinourworld.Ateveryturnwelearntounderstandourworldasoneconstruct‐edfromrigidandbinarycategories;blackvs.white,malevs.female,gayvs. straight, disabled vs. able, native vs. alien, Europe vs. Africa, ourcountryvs.their’s,andsoon.Welearntoviewallthingsthroughaprismthat separatesandopposesoneside fromanother.And to this separa‐tionwe add the qualities that give ‘our’ side its supposed superiority.Thisisawayofconstructingrealitythatensuresnotjustaworldofim‐moveabledivisionsbutoneinwhichwecometoseeourattributes,alle‐giances, and preferences as the stuff thatmakes us better than, moredeserving,more enlightenedor even genetically superior to all others.This polarized, us/them world is the recipe of inevitable and certainprejudiceandhatred.Fearandangercorrodeall relationships.Resent‐ment ofmistreatment and the ache of dehumanization fill the lives ofthosedistinguishedbytheirsupposedfailingsandpathologies.Andfearoftheencroachmentoftheothershapesthepsychologyandpoliticsofthosewhoholdthemselvesassuperior.Ifwedon’tactwithforcetore‐strainandcontaintheother,itisheld,wemightsuccumbtotheirinflu‐ence.Inthisviewsecuritycomesthroughthedominationandsuppres‐sionofothers.

Educatingforpeaceworkswithinwhatappearstobeaparadoxicalworldview.Itassertsontheonehandtheancientspiritualwisdomthatallhumanlifeisofinestimablevalue.Inthisviewallpeoplehaveuncon‐ditionalorinfiniteworth.Itassertsthatallourdistinctionsandsepara‐tions obfuscate the fundamental oneness of existence and the endlessrecyclingandregenerationofourcommonoriginswithintheelementalstardustoftheuniverse.Fromthisperspectiveeducationmeanstoem‐


phasizethepreciousvalueandmeaningofalllife.Itshiftsourfocusfromthequalitiesthatseparateus,andpolarizesus,tothosethatconnectusandspeak tooursimilarities.Security in thisviewdependsnotonourcapacitytodominateorexclude,butonourwillingnesstoshowgener‐osityandopen‐heartedness towardsothers.Ourwell‐being,asMichaelLernersuggests,dependsonthewell‐beingofeveryoneonourplanet.

Whileeducatingforpeacerequiresthatweseetheessentialhumani‐tyofallpeopleitalsorequiresthatwefullyrecognizethewayinwhichourliveshavebeenconditionedandshapedthroughtheparticularityofourlanguage,history,gender,cultureandclass.Whathastheexperienceoflivingmeantforthispersonandthosewhosharethatparticularexpe‐rience? Ithasbeensaid thatone’senemy is someonewhosestoryyouhave not heard. Peace education certainly demands the possibility ofdialogueinwhichone’slifecanbesharedwithothers.Itmeanscultivat‐ingahermeneuticalapproachto‘truth’inwhichtheemphasisislessonwhoseview is right thanon simplyhearingwhat itmeans to growupanddealwithaparticularsetof circumstances.Aprocess thatempha‐sizessympatheticlisteningratherthantheimpulsetoquickjudgment.Itmeanstostrugglewithone’sownimmediateassumptionsandprejudic‐es inorder to trulyhear the challengesandobstacles in the lifeof theother. Such dialogue breaks down or deconstructs—the simplistic anddamagingbinaryviewofidentities.Initsplaceemergesamorecomplexandfluidunderstandingofone’sneighbor.Someonewhoisdifferentinsomerespectsfromoneselfyetsosimilarinothers;apersonwhosebe‐ingisnotsolelydefinedthroughasinglecharacteristicofreligion,race,nationality, disability, etc. And a person who is not fully formed andcompletebutsomeonewhoselifeisevolvingandchanging.

Ofcoursethesharingandnamingofexperiencecanonlybeapartofwhat itmeans to educate forpeace.Theremust alsobeexplorationofthe culture of violence—the social conditions that predispose us to‐wards the harming of others on themacro scalewe nowwitness.WehavetolookatwhatZygmuntBaumanhastermedadiaphorization—thetendency, so pronounced in our world, to become desensitized to thepainandhumiliationofothers.Wehavetolookhereatthewayviolencebecomes entertainment; the way wars are depicted through themassmedia as video games; and the overall consequence of the barrage ofviolent images and themes on our sensibilities as human beings. Wehavetoconsiderhowpovertyandunemploymentsaphumanbeingsofhopeforabetterfutureandopenthedoortoanihilisticrage.Ortheway

26 SVI SHAPIRO

domination—cultural,economicandpolitical,humiliatesanddehuman‐izespeopleandcanbecomeacatalystforsuicidalrevenge.Andwemustrecognize the way that so much of the violence in the world is over‐whelminglyperpetratedbymen.Herewehavetoconsiderthewaymas‐culinityisconstructedaroundtheaxisofpoweranddominance.Vulner‐ability,dependenceandthedesirefornurturanceareregardedassignsof humanweakness (read femininity) that evoke hostility and disgustand are an incitement to violent suppressionwhether in oneself or inothers.

Without thiskindof critical social reflectionwerun the riskofap‐proachingtheissueofviolenceassimplyamanifestationofindividualoreven collective pathology. The mass murders in our schools are ap‐proachedonlyasamatterofpsychopathologyrequiringmoreefficientmentalhealthsystems.SuicidalbombingsbyMuslimsaredisconnectedfromthehistoryofcolonialism,thetraumaofPalestine,orcurrentwest‐erndominationofmuchoftheArabworld.Rapeandbrutalitydirectedagainstwomen,orhomophobicviolence,arenotseenwithinthecontextofaggressiveandauthoritarianformsofmaleidentity.Andwarissome‐how disconnected from themultibillion dollar economic interests thatenthusiasticallyencouragemilitaristicresolutionsofsocialconflicts.

***

Afullerandmoreradicalexpressionofdemocracy,acultureofpeacethat teachesus topracticenon‐violentmeansof resolvinghumancon‐flicts, and relationships between people that celebrate and affirm thebonds of community and interdependence among us are some of thegreat challengesbeforeus in this century.Their failure tobe seriouslyaddressedconfrontsuswiththreatstotheverypossibilityofadesirablehumanfuture.Andallthesechallengeswillrequireeffortsandinterven‐tionsinamultiplicityofwayswithinbothourindividuallivesandacrossthe landscapesofourpublic institutions.Therecanbenodoubtof theextraordinaryimportanceofeducationtomakingthesechanges.Educa‐tionisafterallthatspherewherereason,reflection,imagination,andthecapacity to act with thoughtfulness and creativity is stirred and nur‐tured. Yet it is clear that this far fromwhere the present discourse ofeducationhastakenus.Schoolshavebecomeinstrumentsofconformityandpassivity.Theyareenthralled to the languageofmanagementandcontrolled outcomes,measured by their usefulness to the state as the


means tosupply trainedworkers,and forparentsschoolsmirrorallofthefearsanduncertaintiesofanunsafeandrapidlychangingworld.Forthelatter,educationcan,perhaps,providetheirkidswithanedge,oratleast theminimum set of skills and aptitudes thatwill enable them tosurviveinanincreasinglycompetitivesociety.Yetevenwithinaculturesodominatedbyfearthereisstillhope.Outofthefrozengroundweseeshootsofpossibility.Therearemomentsofrecognitionbyparentsandcitizens that our children’s education should be a joyful, creative andthought‐provokingexperience,notthedullgrindofendlesstests.Teach‐ers are becomingmore vocal about their frustrations as to the lack ofopportunitiesfordialogue,criticalreflectionandmeaningfullearninginthe classroom. Members of the community are voicing their concernsthat schooling seems to provide little that prepares young people foractive and thoughtful participation as citizens of a democracy. Amongstudentsthereisincreasingcriticismofthedrillandtestvarietyofedu‐cationwithitsresultingboredomandalienation.Morestudentsarede‐mandingacurriculumthatisrelevanttotheirlivesandtowhatishap‐pening in theworld. Still itmightbe that in theend theawesomeandterrifyingeventsthatnowconfrontusasaspecieswillprovidethepow‐erfulcatalystforchangeinhowweviewthetaskofeducation.Moreandmoreweseethatthefateoftheearthitselfisnowinthebalance.Wewillhave to confront the fundamental challenges to thewaywe have con‐structed our socialworld or face the dangerous consequences of inac‐tion.Wewill need to teach our children to think deeply and criticallyaboutthecostsofaconsumercultureandhowhumanwantsaremanip‐ulatedintoanendlessdesireformorewithallofitsdevastatingconse‐quences forour resourcesand the flowofpollutants intoourenviron‐ment. We will need to teach our children to think in ways that areholistic—understanding that human life and nature do not stand op‐posedtoeachotherbutareseamlesslyconnectedinaninterdependentweb.Wemustbe stewardsnotviolatorsofournaturalworld.Wewillneed to teach so that our children see themselves not as isolated andself‐contained beings, but members of an interdependent communitywith common needs and shared responsibilities. And we will need toemphasizethatasenseofsocialjusticemustbepresentinallofourhu‐manactionssothattheprivilegedlivesofsomedonotdependonacal‐lousdisregardforthelivesorfateofothers.

Inthistimeofgreatdangerandalsoextraordinarypossibilityeduca‐tors are called towards a prophetic role. They must insist that in the

28 SVI SHAPIRO

conditions that now confront us the present educational agenda onlyreinforces and even compounds our problems. To educate todaymustinstead be an act that helps transform human consciousness and con‐science.Thevisionthatanimatesourworkaseducatorsmustberootedintheancientquest forTikkunOlam—theeffort torepairandhealourworld as a place of generous and loving community, inwhich there isajustsharingofrewardsandobligations,wherehumandifferencesaremediated by respect and recognition, a world of ecological sanity andresponsibility,andwhere there is thewidestdiffusionofopportunitiesfor human beings to participate in shaping the world they live in. Nomatterhowfar‐fetchedorunrealisticsuchavisionmayappeartobeinrelationtothepresentconcernsofschooling,thisisnotimefortimidity.Theimmensedangersandtheextraordinarysufferingwithinwhichwearenowengulfed,demandsfromusabold,daringandimaginativekindofthinking.Anythinglessisanirresponsiblenegationofourobligationstocominggenerations.

REFERENCES

BAUMAN,Z.(1997)PostmodernityanditsDiscontents.NewYork:NewYorkUniver‐sityPress.

COOPERMAN,B.(2007)letterinNewsweek,September3.EHRENREICH,B.(1990)FearofFalling.NewYork:HarperPerennial.EWAN,S.(1988)AllConsumingImages.NewYork:Basic.LERNER,M.(2006)TheLeftHandofGod.SanFrancisco:Harper.MAALOUF,A.(2000)IntheNameofIdentity.NewYorkandLondon:PenguinPress.PURPEL, D. (2004)Reflections on theMoral and SpiritualCrisis inEducation. New

York:PeterLang.SHAPIRO,H.S. (2006)LosingHeart:TheMoralandSpiritualMiseducationofAmer‐

ica’sChildren.NewJersey:LawrenceErlbaum.WEST,C.(2004)DemocracyMatters.NewYork:PenguinPress.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

ZbigniewKwiecińskiThe Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (Poland)

University of Lower Silesia in Wroclaw (Poland)

Education towards difference and inclusion. Two types of discourses —to positive pedagogy*

ABSTRACT.Themaingoalofthisarticleisdescriptionoftwoeducationaldiscoursespertainingto differences, their acceptance and eradication or alleviation. The first is the special needspedagogy,whichhasseenadisputebetweentheenthusiastsofinstitutionalandsocialintegra‐tion of the disabled with people, communities and institutions dominated by those withina given norm. The second is characteristic of the critical pedagogy and sociology—concernspeople and social groups who are culturally and socially excluded and marginalised, bothovertlyandcovertly.

KEYWORDS:inclusion,specialneedspedagogy,criticalpedagogy,positivepedagogy

Inclusion is a category that stands inopposition to exclusion,mar‐ginalizationandsegregationwithregardtopeoplewhodivergefromthehealth,cultural,socialnormsornotfulfillingnormativeexpectationsorinstitutionalandsocialideals(schoolsincluded).

Educational discourses pertaining to differences, their acceptanceand eradication or alleviation can be divided into two trends (cf. Slee,2009). One of them—the special needs pedagogy—has seen a disputebetween the enthusiasts of institutional and social integration of thedisabledwithpeople,communitiesandinstitutionsdominatedbythosewithinagivennorm.Thesecondtrendembracesspecialistcareofpeo‐plewithdifferentkindsofdisabilities,healthdeficienciesorlifethreats.

The second discourse—characteristic of the critical pedagogy andsociology—concerns people and social groups who are culturally andsocially excluded and marginalised, both overtly and covertly. These________________

*Thiswasaninauguraltalkduringthe7thPolishEducationalMeetinginGdańsk,19thSeptember2013.

30 ZBIGNIEW KWIECIŃSKI

practicesaresocially justified, forexample, incasesofsocialselectionsineducation.Theycanalsobefeltasunjustandlikenedtotheunavaila‐bilityofresourcesensuringdecentstandardandqualityoflife.

Despite the fact that processes of social exclusion experienced bypeopleof low cultural and social capitals operate in a spectrumofdo‐mains,thehighsocialcostofexclusion,tendencytobereiteratedcross‐generationally,andthefactthattheyhavebeenwell‐researched,thereisaneedforastrongerdiscourseofeducationalinclusionofmarginalisedgroups.Globally,aswellasmorelocally—inPoland—themaintypesofspecialneedspedagogiesaremedical,psychiatric,guardianship,charity,pastoral,humanistic,andemancipatory.

Criticalpedagogy,sociologyandanthropologyalongwithcriticalso‐cialphilosophyprovidereliableandin‐depthdiagnosesofsocialinequi‐tieswithin educational settings.Moreover, they are a case for positivepedagogy programmes and systematically broaden the catalogue ofgroups likely to be marginalised, including the social MAJORITY, i.e.women(cf.Chmura‐Rutkowskaetal.,2013;Gromkowska‐Melosik,2011).Polishsocialpedagogy,initiatedbyHelenaRadlińskaandrecentlycrea‐tivelyrereadbyLechWitkowski,hashadanextensive tradition in thisrespect.TomaszSzkudlarekschoolofphilosophicalandanthropologicalpedagogyhashadaspecialimpactonthecriticalpedagogy.

Within this paradigm, for instance, Basil Bernstein demands thateverypersonisgrantedthepossibilityofexercisingtheirrightstoafulldevelopment, building positive social relations, and political participa‐tion.Hedoesthatongroundsofwidelyknownresearchintotherepro‐ductionofculturaldifferencesdeterminedbytheenvironmentofprimarysocialisationandenculturation.Here,education(alsocalled“pedagogy”)isunderstoodasalifelongdevelopmentaleffortofanindividualtolearnfromallpossiblesourcesandtobuildtheiridentity.

Asimilarlybroadstructuralandfunctionalprogrammeofpreventingsocialinequityinaccessingcultureanddecentlifehasbeenproposedbya Swedish sociologist, GoranTherborn (2006).According to him therearethreetypesofunjustdifferencesinthesocialstandingofindividuals.These are: vital (concerning health and life), existential (concerningfreedom, respect, relations, outlook, and identity), and resources (con‐cerning income, wealth, standard and quality of life). Within mecha‐nismsof creating inequality, such asdistancing, exclusion, hierarchisa‐tion,andexploitation,hehasdistinguishedcausativeentitiesandfactorsfrom the systemic dynamisms and functions. Therborn has pointed to

Education towards difference and inclusion 31

typesofequalitymechanism,suchas(1)catching‐up(earlyrecognitionofcommunitiesatthreat,compensatorycapacitation,affirmativeaction,field‐evening, counselling and encouragement institutions, actionsboostingtheautonomyoftheexcluded),(2)inclusion(entitlement,facil‐itatingmigration,demandingandthefight forobservinghumanrights),(3)resourcesredistribution(taxes,politicsandsocialcare).

Systemicapplicationofstrategiesandresourcesaimingatreducingacute and unjust differences, however, is neither common nor easy toacceptincontemporarydemocraticstates.Indeed,democracyisfundedontwopillars:freedomandequalitywhichareinconstantandinevita‐bleconflict(JohnRawls).

Emphasising freedom (over equality) leads to justifying any differ‐ences and treating them as natural. Their reconciliation is possible aspart of voluntary help and acts of mercy. This takes place within theneoliberal system, within which education undergoes the rules of thefreemarket,asasystemicruleofself‐regulation.Inaweakerform,thedominanceoffreedomresultsinelitismandentrustingtheenlightenedupper classeswith leading thenation towardsprosperity.Here, in therepublicanreality,unequalaccessissimplypetrified,alongwithdifficultaccesstothehighqualityofeducation.

Emphasising equality (over freedom) in liberal systems leads tomakingrightsandstructuralaccessequal.Thisalsoconcernsalllevelsofeducation, roles, and occupations, irrespective of the social and ethnicbackground, gender or race. This, however, does not entail systemicinterventions inthecaseofexercisingtherighttoequalchances inad‐vancingone’ssocialstatusorescapingthereproductionofpovertyandexclusion.

According to J. Rawls, fully‐fledged democracy—in fact, social de‐mocracy—strongly emphasising the rule of social equality, causes sys‐temicinterventionswiththeviewofpreventingunjustdifferencesrightattheoutset,onone’swaytowardsprosperousadulthoodandcompen‐satingforsocialandculturalexclusion.

Backing‐up J. Rawls’ arguments are comparative studies comingfrom the field of socialmedicine (carried out globally by RichardWil‐kinson andKate Pickett, 2010). In their recent book, under the tellingtitleThe spirit level.Why greater equalitymakes societies stronger, theauthorshaveshownthatthegreaterthedifferencesinincomelevelsandlivingstandards,thegreaterarethenumberofthepoorlyeducatedwithrestricted access to culture.Moreover, thesedifferences correlatewith


poor social relations (saturated with mistrust, and hostility), highernumbers ofmentally ill and addicted to drugs, higher level of obesity,morepregnanciesamongteenagers,highercrimelevelsandimprisonedpeople,andpoorersocialmobilitywithinonesociety.

In contemporary Poland, John Rawls’ or Richard Wilkinson’s andKatePickett’sargumentsarenotonlynotobviousbutmightbringaboutassociationswith the negative experiences of the alleged communism,abandoning socially and educationally beneficial structural solutionsfromthePolishPeople’sRepublic.

Ifwehaveacarefullookatthetypologyofthecontemporarydemoc‐racyasseenbyJohnRawls,oratexperiencesofprofessorNicholasCari‐tat—aprotagonistof abookbyStevenLukes (2003)—a tourist travel‐ling through democratic countries after he escaped an authoritarianstate,wecanquiteeasilystatethatPolandhasbeenattemptingtoincor‐porate all these characteristics at once for the last quarter of century(alongwithdemonsoftheauthoritarianpastandthelongcompromisedcatchphrases of national closure and xenophobic distancing from any‐thing different). As a countrywe have been drifting quite long on thisastonishingconvergenceofpoliticalsystems.Wemayarriveatthesameconclusionhavingreadthereviewofthecontemporarytypesofdemoc‐racyandtheeducationsystemsfunctioningwithinthem,carriedoutbyAharonAviraminhisbooktitledNavigatingthroughthestorm.Reinvent‐ingeducationforpostmoderndemocracies(Aviram,2010).

Nobody and nothing can free us—educators—from seeing educa‐tionalinstitutionsasobligedtoprovideeverybody—irrespectiveoftheirnon‐normativity—withkey competencesof access to the symbolic cul‐ture,whichisfundamentaltoensuringprosperouslife,respectforone‐self,goodsocialrelationsandtakingpartinpoliticaldecisions.

Exclusion, oftenwithin education and through education, concernsaspectrumofdevelopmentalpossibilities,partialdevelopmentaldisabil‐ities,accesstogoodsocialrelations,achievinghighersocialandprofes‐sional standing, access to culture and in political decisions and citizenactivity.

From this perspective, inclusion seems to be a moral imperative,apoliticalrule,goodqualityofpublicdiscourse,transparentevaluationcriteria,open‐mindednesswithregardtodifferencesandtypesoforien‐tation,equaltreatmentofallnon‐normativity,removingbarriers,nega‐tivereactiontohatespeech,xenophobiaandmarkingnon‐normativity,creating the possibility and institution of another chance, constructive


opposition todeprivingpeopleof specialist careand leavingweakandhelplesspeopletotheirowndevices.Atthesametime,however,inclusioncannot be synonymous with annexation, appropriation, granting sup‐posed autonomy, depriving one of independence; also, it cannotmeanacceptingattemptsofsocialdominationofthemarginalisedgroups.

Shouldeducationforinclusionmean—asBernsteinwants—support‐ingeachindividualtowardstheirfulldevelopmentalpossibility,andoneofthemeaningsof ‘inclusion’is ‘integrity’(seeEuropeanunionconver‐gence policy), making development consistent also concerns intrapsy‐chicareas.

KenWilber’smodelofintegralhumanmind(Wilber,2006)function‐ingandthedevelopmentofawarenesslevelshelpsustounderstandthatone individual can find themselves at different levels of developmentrelated to thinking, intuition, emotions, needs, values, andmotivation.Furthermore, people also differwith respect to the scope and activitylevelofthefourquartersofmind(relatedtocorporealityandego,socialrelations,cultureandenvironment).

Moreover, people of different awareness levels coexist next to oneanother:startingwitharchaic(focusedonsurvival),magical(focusedonloyaltytowardsatribeundertheprotectionofgods),throughtraditionalawareness(fightingforaterritoryandreligion)modernawareness(pre‐ferred nowadays competition for success), finishing with postmodernawareness (community‐based and focused on tolerating differences),andintegrating,global,transcentendentalawarenesstypes.

Withinthedomainofeducation,onecannotignoretheneedtobal‐ance these intrapsychicstructuresandtheneedtoestablishgoodrela‐tionsbetweenpeopleofdifferentawarenesslevels.Thereisalsoaneedforintegratedattitudesthatalsoconcerndivergentstancestowardspastandfuture.SomeapplicationsofthisamazingconceptionbyWilbercanbe noticed in Poland (e.g. Kielar, 2012; Kielar & Kop, 2012; Przybo‐rowska,2013;Błajet,2012).

Sincetheideaof‘convergencepolicy’hasbeenmentioned,weneedtotakethequestionofcross‐culturalopen‐mindednessandmobilityonboard.PolishbordersremainopenandPolesaresaidtoberemarkablymobileandpresentglobally,especially in theWesternEuropeancoun‐tries.Howaretheypreparedforthesemigrations?Whatisthequalityofeducation that they receive?What do they learn amid foreigners andfromthem?Ontheirreturn,whatarethebehaviourpatterns,lifestyles,acquiredhabitus they comebackwith?Howdowe,Poles, receive for‐


eigners?What kind of education do we offer them and what do theylearnfromus?Whatareourrelationswithourneighbours?Doweknowthemand,ifyes,towhatdegreedoweunderstandthem?Canwecoop‐eratewiththemanddiscoverdistinctnessofhistoricalmemory?Canwebuilddialoguedespitedifferences?

The other type of critical pedagogical discourse of inclusion is thepedagogy of caring to introduce students to rules and competences offull,prosperous life (as couldbe seen in theworksofBernstein,2000,andTherborn,2006).Here, invaluable is theresearchandpublicationswhichreconstructandrevitalisecomplexpedagogicalsystemsfromthepast(e.g.Andrukowicz,2006;Szulakiewicz,2011;Witkowski,2013),butalsosuccessfulboldeducationalexperiments(e.g.Garbula,2010;Urliń‐ska,2007), touchuponthe issueofsense,self‐fulfilmentand joyof life(e.g.Michalski,2011;Murawska,2008;Wajsprych,2011;Żywczok,2011).Theseimportantresearchthemesaretakenupanddevelopedtoorarely.

Fortunately,withinthepositivepedagogythepedagogyoftalentandcreativity, encouraging activation and social inclusion of talented andcreativepeople, but also thedevelopmentof individual’s specific skillswithin regular state‐funded schools fares well (e.g. Krasoń, 2005;Limont,2005;Szmidt&Modrzejewska‐Świgulska,2013).Anemerging,and already visible trend, is the anthropological pedagogy (e.g. Cer‐vinkova&Gołębniak,2013).

***

The Polish Pedagogical Association was established over 32 yearsago thanks to themassive opposition to and rejection of the previouspoliticalsystem.TheAssociationheadquarterswaslocatedinGdańsk.Itwassetupwiththehopeofenablingunconstraineddiscussionsonthebesteducationalsolutionsintheindependent,democraticPolandamongeducators ignoring institutional and generational divisions. Hence onecanwitnessour longstanding involvement in theanalysisof reciprocalrelationsbetweenthedynamicsofpoliticalsystemchangeandpossibleeducational changes. The substantial systemic changes that took placeoverthelastquarterhavenotresultedindefiningacleartrajectorytobepursued per se, including the transparent development of beneficialeducation on all levels. Perhaps, the trajectory of educational develop‐mentcanbebuiltonlyonthebottomupbasisandhencetheemphasisonpedagogicalresearchonpositiveeducationalvisionsandexperiences.Naturally,includingtheonesconcerningdifferencesandinclusion.


Themost recent book by Dariusz Kubinowski titledRozwój badańjakościowychwpedagogicepolskiejnaprzełomieXXiXXIwieku[Thede‐velopment of qualitative research in Polish pedagogy at the turn of the20th and 21st centuries] (Kubinowski, 2013) draws our attention toabout40thousandsuccessfulresearchprojectsbyeducatorsinvolvedindifferent types of humanist empirical investigations rejecting theposi‐tivistparadigm.Thereforewecan lookat the futureofhumanistpeda‐gogy with cautious optimism as opposed to, for instance, psychologywhichseemstobetrappedinthepositivistparadigm.Thisispreferredby the ‘corrupted science’ (Krimsky, 2006), the competitive researchfunding system, where discovery and comprehension do not seem tomatter;whatmatters,though,iscounting…benefits.

It might be that POSITIVE HUMANIST PEDAGOGIES are our goodperspective…

REFERENCES

ANDRUKOWICZ,W.(2006)Szlachetnypożytek.OfilozoficznejpedagogiceBronisławaF.Trentowskiego.Szczecin:WydawnictwoUniwersytetuSzczecińskiego.

AVIRAM,A.(2010)Navigatingthroughthestorm.Reinventingeducationforpostmod‐erndemocracies.Rotterdam:SensePublishers.

BERNSTEIN, B. (2000) Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Theory, research,critique.Boston:Rowman&Littlefield.

BŁAJET P. (2012) Od edukacji sportowej do olimpijskiej. Studium antropologiczne.Kraków:OficynaWydawnicza“Impuls”.

CERVINKOVA,H.&GOŁĘBNIAKD.B.(eds.)(2013)Edukacyjnebadaniawdziałaniu.Warszawa:WydawnictwoNaukoweScholar.

CHMURA‐RUTKOWSKA,I.,GŁOWACKA‐SOBIECH,E.&SKÓRZYŃSKA,I.(eds.)(2013)Historia ludzi – historia dla ludziKrytycznywymiar edukacji historycznej.Kra‐ków:OficynaWydawnicza“Impuls”.

GARBULA, J. (2010)Znaczeniahistorycznewedukacjipoczątkowej.Narracyjnekon‐struowaniehistoriirodzinnych.Olszyn:WydawnictwoUniwersytetuWarmińsko‐Mazurskiego.

GROMKOWSKA‐MELOSIK, A. (2011)Edukacja i (nie)równość społecznakobiet. Stu‐diumdynamikidostępu.Kraków:OficynaWydawnicza“Impuls”.

KIELAR,M. B. (2012) IntegralnawizjaKenaWilbera i jej zastosowaniew edukacji.Warszawa:WydawnictwoAkademiiPedagogikiSpecjalnej.

KIELAR,M.B.&GOP,A.(2012)Integralnypluralizmmetodologiczny.Teoriaibadanianaukowe.Warszawa:WydawnictwoAkademiiSpecjalnej.

KRASOŃ,K.(2005)Dziecięceodkrywanietekstuliterackiego–kinestetyczneinterpre‐tacjeliryki.Katowice:WydawnictwoUniwersytetuŚląskiego.

KRIMSKY,S.(2006)Naukaskorumpowana?TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyB.Biały.Warszawa:PIW.


KUBINOWSKI,D. (2013)Rozwójbadań jakościowychwpedagogicepolskiejnaprze‐łomieXXiXXIwieku.Lublin:WydawnictwoMakmed.

LUKES,S. (2003)NiezwykłeoświecenieprofesoraCaritata.Komedia idei.Warszawa:WarszawskieWydawnictwoLiterackieMuza.

LIMONT,W.(ed.)(2005)Teoria ipraktykaedukacjiuczniówzdolnych.Kraków:Ofi‐cynaWydawnicza“Impuls”.

MICHALSKI,J.(2011)Sensżyciaapedagogika.ImpulsymyśliViktoraFrankla.Toruń:WydawnictwoNaukoweUMK.

MURAWSKA,A.(2008)Edukacjajakotroskaonadziejęczłowieka.Szczecin:Wydaw‐nictwoUniwersytetuSzczecińskiego.

PRZYBOROWSKA, B. (2013) Pedagogika innowacyjności.Między teorią a praktyką.Toruń:WydawnictwoNaukoweUMK.

SLEE,R.(2009)Theinclusionparadox.Theculturalpoliticsofdifference.In:Apple,A.W.,Au,W.&Gandin,L.A.(eds.)TheRoutledgeInternationalHandbookofCrit‐icalEducation.NewYork–London:Routledge.

SZMIDT,K.J.&MODRZEJEWSKA‐ŚWIGULSKA,M.(eds.)(2013)Zasobytwórczeczło‐wieka.Wprowadzeniedopedagogikipozytywnej.Łódź:WydawnictwoUniwersy‐tetuŁódzkiego.

SZULAKIEWICZ, W. (ed.) (2011) Przełomy edukacyjne. Dziedzictwo polskiej teoriiipraktyki.Toruń:WydawnictwoAdamMarszałek.

THERBORN, G. (ed.) (2006) Inequalities of theworld.New theoretical frameworksmultipleempiricalapproaches.London–NewYork:Verso.

URLIŃSKA,M.(2007)Szkołapolskanaobczyźniewobecdylematówtożsamościowych.NaprzykładzieszkołypolskiejnaŁotwie.Toruń:WydawnictwoNaukoweUMK.

WAJSPRYCH,D.(2011)Pedagogiaagatologiczna.Studiumhermeneutyczno‐krytyczneprojektu etycznego Józefa Tischnera. Toruń–Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo NaukoweUMK.

WILBER,K.(2006)Integralnateoriawszystkiego.Poznań:WydawnictwoZyskiS‐ka.WILKINSON, R. & PICKETT, K. (2010)The spirit level.Whygreater equalitymakes

societiesstronger.NewYork:BloomsburyPress.WITKOWSKI, L. (2013) Przełom dwoistościw pedagogice polskiej. Historia, teoria,

krytyka.Kraków:OficynaWydawnicza“Impuls”.ŻYWCZOK,A.(2011)Kuafirmacjiżycia.Pedagogicznepodstawypomyślnejegzysten‐

cji.Katowice:WydawnictwoUniwersytetuŚląskiego.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

JennaM.CaltonUniversity of Florida (USA)

MartinHeesackerUniversity of Florida (USA)

PaulB.PerrinVirginia Commonwealth University (USA)

The elusiveness of progressive masculinity: Gender differences in conceptualizations

of nontraditional gender roles

ABSTRACT. Traditionalmasculinity has been thoroughly explored in psychological research,butitscounterpart,progressivemasculinity,hasundergonerelativelylittlescientificinvestiga‐tion.Todeterminewhetherthislackofattentiontoorunderstandingofprogressivemasculini‐tyismirroredmorelargelyinmainstreamculture,weexaminedhowmenandwomenconcep‐tualize and experience gender roles in their everyday lives. Participants were randomlyassigned to describe a time inwhich they had behaved either traditionally or progressivelywith regard to their gender. Over 80% ofmen andwomen in the traditional condition andwomenintheprogressiveconditionprovidedcondition‐appropriateexamples.However,menintheprogressiveconditiononlyprovidedprogressiveexamples17%ofthetime,suggestingthatmanymenmaynothaveanunderstandingofprogressivemasculinity.Additionalthemes,implications,anddirectionsforresearchonprogressivemasculinityarediscussed.

KEYWORDS:masculinity,femininity,progressive,nontraditional,genderroles

Althoughpsychological research onmasculinity and femininityhasbeenpopularfordecades,researchershaveyettoexploreamajorpieceof thegender ideologypuzzle.Plentyof literatureexistsonboth tradi‐tionalandnontraditionalnotionsoffemininity,andampleresearchhasbeen conducted on traditional forms of masculinity, but comparablylittleresearchexistsonnontraditional,progressivenotionsofmasculini‐ty.Mostmasculinityresearchexaminestheeffectsoftraditionalmascu‐linegenderrolesonmen’smentalhealth,withminimalexaminationofotherformsofmasculinity.Assuch,discussionsofmasculinityseemtobifurcatethemasculinitiesinto(a)traditionalmasculinityasdefinedin

38 JENNA M. CALTON, MARTIN HEESACKER, PAUL B. PERRIN

contemporaryculture,and(b)“other”formsofmasculinitythatinsomewaysdeviatefromtraditionalmasculinity.Indoingso,researchershaveyetexplicitly to labelalternativesto traditionalmasculinitywithwhichmenwhoespousenontraditionalgenderideologiescanidentify.

Thepurposeofthisexploratorystudyistogatherinformationabouthowmen conceptualize progressive masculinity in their own lives, inorder topromoteadeeperunderstandingofgenderandaclearerpor‐trait of themany facesofmasculinity.Because the lackof researchonprogressive masculinity stands in stark contrast to the abundant re‐searchon femininityandtraditionalmasculinity,webeginbyacknowl‐edgingthemajorthemesfromtheseliteraturesandthenbrieflyreviewforms ofmasculinity other than traditional before presenting the con‐structofprogressivemasculinity.

Traditional femininity

Researchonfemininityandthestudyofwomenperhapsmostclearlyilluminate the lacuna in researchonmasculinity, asboth traditionalandprogressivefemininityhavebeenthefocusofextensivescientificinves‐tigation. Traditional feminine gender roles dictate that women shouldfocusonrelationships,benice,physicallyattractive,thin,silent,nurturingofothers,deferenttomen,submissive,anddomestic(Crawford&Unger,2000;Gilbert& Scher, 1999;Mahalik, 2005). Thedevelopment of psy‐chologicalmeasuressuchastheConformitytoFeminineNormsInvento‐ry (CFNI;Mahaliketal.,2003)and theAdolescentFemininity IdeologyScale (AFIS; Tolman& Porche, 2000) has propelled research on tradi‐tional femininity. Via these and other instruments, research has con‐nectedwomen’sadherencetotraditional femininegenderroles topsy‐chological distress, such as eating disorders (Affleck, 1999;Mahalik etal.,2005)andbodydissatisfaction(Cahill&Mussap,2007;Tiggemann,2006),aswellastoinformvariouspsychotherapieswithwomen.

Nontraditional femininity

In addition to the plentiful research on traditional femininity, re‐search on nontraditional forms of femininity also exists, perhaps be‐cause of the long‐standing history and strength of the feministmove‐

The elusiveness of progressive masculinity 39

ment. Feminism, a formof nontraditional femininity, giveswomen thefreedomtohavecareers,besingle,childless, leaders, loud,reject tradi‐tional ideals of beauty (such as being thin and having long hair), andoften explicitly reject traditional femininity. Researchers have createdscalestomeasurefeministideology,suchastheFeministIdentityScale(FIS; Rickard, 1987), the Feminist Identity Development Scale (FIDS;Bargad&Hyde, 1991), and the Liberal FeministAttitude and IdeologyScale (LFAIS; Morgan, 1996). Research has connected the espousal offeministprinciplestobettermentalhealth,suchaslowerlevelsofdisor‐dered eating (Sabik&Tylka, 2006). This type of research, in turn, hashelpedinformfeministpsychotherapies,makingtheexplorationofnon‐traditional femininityimportant inwomen’smentalhealthcare.Collec‐tively, research on traditional andnontraditional femininity andwom‐en’smental health has helped scientists and clinicians understand theuniqueexperiencesofwomenandhowtheespousalofvariousfeminini‐tiesaffectswomen’slives.

Traditional masculinity

In comparison to psychological research on traditional femininity,researchontraditionalmasculinityisperhapsequallyabundant.Tradi‐tionalmasculinegender roles indicate thatmen shouldavoid femininebehavior, strive for success and achievement, show noweakness, andseek adventure, even if violence is a necessary part of that adventure(David & Brannon, 1976; Levant & Richmond, 2007; Mahalik, 2003).Many psychologicalmeasures have been created and used to examinetheeffectsoftraditionalmasculinegenderrolesonmen’smentalhealth.These include the Brannon Masculinity Scale (BMS; Brannon & Juni,1984),theConformitytoMasculineNormsInventory(CMNI;Mahaliketal.,2003),theGenderRoleConflictScale(GRCS;O’Neiletal.,1986),andtheMaleRoleNormsInventory(Levant&Fischer,1998).Sincethecrea‐tionof thesemeasures,men’sadherence to traditionalmasculinityhasbeenlinkedtoanxiety,depression,homophobia,lowself‐esteem,maritalissues, poor physical health, restricted emotionality, and substanceabuse(O’Neil,2008).

Bycontrast,psychologicalresearchonnontraditionalmasculinityisrare.Thisomissionisevidentinrecentreviewsofmasculinityresearch.Forexample,neitherLevantandRichmond’s (2007) reviewofpsycho‐


logical research onmasculine ideologies norWong, Steinfeldt, Speight,and Hickman’s content analysis of Psychology ofMen andMasculinity(2010)explicitlydiscussesnontraditionalversionsofmasculinity,whichisreflectiveofthelackofprimaryresearchonnontraditionalmasculini‐ty in thepsychological literature.However,severalmasculinitiesschol‐arshave identified“other”formsofmasculinitythantraditionalmascu‐linity,andabriefreviewofwhichisprovidedbelow.

Other forms of masculinity

Inresponsetotheliterature’sheavyfocusonthenegativeaspectsoftraditional masculinity, Kiselica, Englar‐Carlson, Horne, and Fisher(2008)introducedtheconstructofpositivemasculinity,whichhighlightsmalestrengthsandthepositiveaspectsof traditionalmasculinity,suchashowtraditionalmasculinegenderrolescanbenefitmen.KiselicaandEnglar‐Carlson(2010)discussedaformalframeworkemphasizingmalestrengths as the starting point for psychotherapy with boys andmen.Similarly,GoodandHammer (2010)empirically examined the connec‐tions between positive psychology and traditional masculine genderroles and found thatmenwho conformed to the traditionalmasculinegenderroleofrisk‐takingreportedhigherlevelsofpersonalcourageandphysicalendurance.ArelatedtopicwasalsodiscussedbyDavies,Shen‐Miller,andIsaco(2010),whopresentedpossiblemasculinity,whichtheydefinedas“anaspirationalandfuture‐orientedgoalformen’sidentitiesandbehaviorsbasedon(a)whatmenwanttobeinthefuture,(b)whatmen require to meet their developmental needs, and (c) what we, asa community, need frommen to foster community safety and health”(Davies,Shen‐Miller&Isaco,2010,p.348).Althoughexploringpositiveandpossiblemasculinity isvital todevelopingacomprehensiveunder‐standing of how traditional masculine gender roles affect individual’slives, both formsofmasculinity remainbasedon traditionalmasculinenorms.

Anumberof authorshave also addressedmen’s reactions tohege‐monicmasculinity(Connell&Messerschmidt,2005;Pompper,2010).Forexample,WetherellandEdley(1999)discussedhowmenpositionthem‐selves in relation to hegemonic masculinity. These authors conductedaseriesof interviews inwhichtheyaskedmenwhethertheyclassifiedthemselves as “masculine men” and discovered the following three


themes:(a)menalignedthemselveswithconventionalmasculineideals,(b) men separated themselves from conventional ideals, which theyviewed as stereotypical, and saw themselves as normal or ordinary incomparison,and(c)menresistedhegemonicmasculinityandsawthem‐selvesasunconventional.Theauthors,however,didnotdiscussnontra‐ditionalmasculinity or othermasculinities. This is another example ofhowtheliteraturehascontinuedtoexploretraditionalformsofmascu‐linityorevenattimestherejectionofitwithoutprovidingacleardirec‐tionformentomove.Similarly,Allen(2007)exploredromanticmascu‐linity in relation to hegemonic masculinity, but found that romanticmasculinity substantiated hegemonic masculinity, as men’s romanticidentities were grounded in active male sexuality and passive femalesexuality.

Also,someauthorshavediscussedformsofnontraditionalmasculin‐itythatarespecifictoracial/ethnicgroups.Forexample,HammondandMattis (2005) asked African American men what manhood meant tothemandfoundthemesintheirresponsesthatweremostlytraditional,suchasbeingaprovider,butalsosomethatwerenontraditional,suchasbeingabletoexpressone’semotionsfreely.FocusinginsteadonLatinos,Arciniegaandcolleagues(2008)introducedtheconceptofcaballerismo,anextensionofthewordcaballero(aSpanishgentleman)asthepositivenontraditionalcounterpart to the traditionalmachismo, in theirdiscus‐sion of Latino masculine ideologies, even developing the TraditionalMachismo and Caballerismo Scale (TMCS; Arciniega et al., 2008). Re‐search like this on nontraditional masculinity specific to racial/ethnicgroups is critical to understanding various formsofmasculinity, but itmayhavelimitationsingeneralizingtootherracial/ethnicgroups.

Fromthisbriefreview,onecanconclude thatresearchershavebe‐gun to discuss formsofmasculinity other than traditionalmasculinity,butarestill in the infancyof forgingclearorwidelyaccepted terms todescribealternativestotraditionalmasculinity.Wethereforenowintro‐ducetheconceptofprogressivemasculinityintotheempiricalliterature.Though a comprehensive or final definition of progressivemasculinitymaybebeyondthescopeofthisarticle,weofferthefollowingworkingdefinitionbecauseonehasnot yet beenoffered: a formofmasculinityemphasizing movement away from traditional male gender roles thatare detrimental, restrictive, and oppressing ofwomen, and instead to‐ward volitional and egalitarian behaviors, values, and beliefs. Progres‐sivemasculinity is different frompositivemasculinity in that progres‐


sivemasculinityrefers toaspectsofnontraditionalmasculinityempha‐sizing gender‐role freedom and principles of gender equality,whereaspositivemasculinityreferstothepositiveaspectsandstrengthsoftradi‐tionalmasculinity.

Thecurrentstudyisapreliminaryattempttoexplorethenatureofprogressivemasculinity. In order to determinewhether the lack of at‐tention toorunderstandingof progressivemasculinity in the researchliteratureismirroredmorelargelywithinmainstreamculture,thisstudyexaminedhowwomenandmenconceptualizeandexperiencetradition‐al andprogressivenotions of gender in their everyday lives.Male andfemaleparticipantswererandomlyassignedtodescribeatimeinwhichthey had behaved either progressively or traditionally with regard totheir gender. This methodology allowed a comparison of progressivemasculinitytothemostcloselyrelatedconcepts:traditionalmasculinity,progressivefemininity,andtraditionalfemininity.

Thisstudyexplorestworesearchquestions.ResearchQuestion1askshowparticipantswillrespondwhenaskedtorecountatimeintheirliveswhentheyactedprogressivelywithregardtotheirgender.ResearchQues‐tion2askshowparticipantswillrespondwhenaskedtorecountatimeintheirliveswhentheyactedtraditionallywithregardtotheirgender.

Method

Participants

Participants were enrolled in introductory psychology courses ata large, southeastern, public university in theUnited States (n= 324),and participation satisfied a course requirement. Participants’ agesrangedfrom18to50years(M=18.63,SD=2.02).Inthissample,28.2%ofparticipantsidentifiedasmaleand71.8%asfemale.Ofthesepartici‐pants,65.9%identifiedasfirstyearstudents,19.2%assecondyearstu‐dents,9%asthirdyearstudents,4.6%asfourthyearstudents,0.3%asfifth year students, and 0.9% as sixth year students. Of these partici‐pants,15.8%identifiedasHispanicorLatino/a,and84.2%asNotHis‐panicorLatino/a.Inaddition,73.1%ofparticipantsidentifiedasWhiteor European American, 12.1% as Black or African American, 9.3% asAsian,0.3%asAmericanIndianorAlaskaNative,0.6%asNativeHawai‐ianorOtherPacificIslander,and4.6%asmulti‐racial.


Procedure

A description of the study was posted on the university’s surveywebsite used to inform students in introductory psychology coursesaboutcourserequirementopportunities.Participantsaccessedthesur‐veyviaanelectroniclinkiftheywishedtoparticipateforcoursecredit.After accessing the survey website, participants viewed an informed‐consent page and provided electronic voluntary consent to participatein the study. Participants then completed a short demographic formonwhich they indicated their age, school status, sex, and racial/ethnicidentity.

Participants were randomly assigned to one of two instructions,stratifiedby gender. Participants in the “real” conditionwere asked toreflectonasituationinwhichtheyfeltasthoughtheywere“real”menorwomen,andparticipantsinthe“progressive”conditionwereaskedtoreflect on a situation inwhich they felt as though theywere “progres‐sive”menorwomen.Allparticipantswereaskedtowritebrieflyabouttheexperienceandreflectupontheirownexperienceinordertoensurethat they reported a direct, personalmemory of an actual experience.Participants were not supplied with definitions of the terms “real” or“progressive”becausedoing sowouldhave influenced theirnotionsofwhatthetermsmeant,whichwastheprimaryconstructunderscrutinyinthestudy.Thismanipulationpermittedanexaminationofhowwom‐enandmenconceptualized traditionalandprogressivenotionsofgen‐der in their own lives. Participants then answered the following ques‐tions in order to allow an examination of the contextual influences onparticipants’descriptionsoftheir“real”or“progressive”gender‐relatedbehaviors:“Howmeaningfulwasthiseventforyou?”“Howcommondoyouthinkthistypeofexperienceisforothermen/women?”“Howmanymaleswerepresentatthetimeofthisevent?”“Whatwasyourrelation‐ship to them?” “How many females were present at the time of thisevent?”and“Whatwasyourrelationshiptothem?”

Aspartofa largerstudynotaddressed in thisarticle,malepartici‐pants then completed the Conformity to Masculine Norms Inventory(CMNI;Mahaliketal.,2003)andtheGenderRoleConflictScale(GRCS;O’Neil et al., 1986), and female participants then completed the Con‐formitytoFeminineNormsInventory(CFNI;Mahaliketal.,2005).


Data analysis

Inordertodeterminewhetherparticipantswereabletogiveappro‐priateexamplesfromtheirlivesaccordingtotheinstructionalconditiontowhichtheyhadbeenrandomlyassigned,participants’responseswerecodedas“Progressive”iftheirresponsetothepromptcontainedexclu‐sivelyprogressiveornontraditionalnotionsoftheirgender,“Tradition‐al” if theirresponsecontainedexclusivelyrealor traditionalnotionsoftheir gender, “Progressive andTraditional” if their response containedboth progressive/nontraditional and real/traditional notions of theirgender,or“None” if theirresponsecontainedneitherprogressive/non‐traditionalnorreal/traditionalnotionsoftheirgender.Thestudy’sfirstandsecondauthorsservedasthejudgesandwereofdifferentgenders,ages,andprofessionalbackgrounds.Theycodedthedataindependentlyandwereblindtoparticipantcondition,thoughforappropriatecoding,theyhadtoknowthesexofparticipants.

Whencodingmaleparticipants’responsesasprogressive,bothraterswerelookingforresponsesthatwerenontraditionaland/orwerefocusedongenderequality and rejectingof restrictivenotionsofmasculinity. Inthe coding scheme,progressivemasculinitywas identifiedby responsesthatdidnotconformto the items inO’Neil’sGRCS(1986)andMahalik’sCMNI(2003)measures.Forexample,GRCSItem7is“Affectionwithothermenmakesmetense,”soanyparticipantresponsethatdiscussedexpress‐ing physical or emotional affection for another other man (like kiss‐ing/hugging/telling aman you love him) and feeling good about itwasconsideredprogressive.Responseswerecodedastraditionalthatfocusedontheoppressionofwomen(i.e.weresexist)orincludedtraditionalno‐tionsofmasculinityasdescribedinO’Neil’sGRCSandMahalik’sCMNI.

When coding female participants’ responses as progressive, bothraterswerelookingforresponsesthatwerenontraditionaland/orwerefocusedongenderequalityandrejectingof restrictivenotionsof femi‐ninity. In the coding scheme, progressive femininity was identified byresponses thatdidnot conform to the items inMahalik’sCFNI (2005).Forexample,CFNIItem11is“Havingaromanticrelationshipisessentialin life,” so any participant response that discussed self‐reliance or notneedingarelationshippartnertofeelcompletewasconsideredprogres‐sive. Responseswere coded as traditional that focused on the oppres‐sionofwomen(i.e.weresexist)orincludedtraditionalnotionsoffemi‐ninityasdescribedinMahalik’sCFNI.


Thefactthatthejudgesdidnotknowwhetherparticipantswerein‐structedtoreporta“progressive”or“real”genderexperienceeliminatedan important source of confirmatory bias, as did the independence oftheir ratings. Initially, discrepancies between judges occurred in 50 of324 cases (15%). Subsequent conversations between the judges re‐solvedthese50discrepanciessuccessfullyineverycase.Twenty‐oneof50cases (42%)producedagreementwith theoriginal judgmentof thefirst author, 17 of 50 (34%) resolved in agreement with the originaljudgmentofthesecondauthor,and12of50(24%)resolvedwithbothagreeingtoacompletelydifferentanalysis.Innocasesdidthejudgesfailtoreachagreement.

Results

Research Question 1 asked how participants would respond whenaskedtorecountatimeintheirliveswhentheyhadactedprogressivelywith regard to their gender.Mostof themaleparticipants in the “pro‐gressive”instructionconditionrespondedtotheprogressivepromptbyrecountinganexperiencethatreflectedtraditionalnotionsofmasculinity.Only17%ofthemaleparticipantsinthe“progressive”conditionprovidedresponses that reflected progressive notions ofmasculinity, free of anyreferences to traditionalmasculine gender roles (Figure 1). Instead, themajority (43%) ofmale participants responded to the “progressive” in‐structionbyrecountingatimeinwhichtheyhadactedtraditionally.

Figure1:Percentofparticipantswhoprovidedacondition‐appropriateresponse


Forinstance,aparticipantinthe“progressive”conditionrespondedtothepromptbyrecountingthefollowingexperience:

Iwasbuilding a table in a groupof three, inwhich Iwashappened tobegrouped with two other females. For some reason, I felt as if my groupmembersdidnothavetheskillsrequiredtobuildatableoutofplainwoodsandscrews. [T]herefore, I tookcharge,andexplained to them[how] togoaboutandfinishthejob.

Thisparticipant’sresponseisnotonlyalignedwithtraditionalmas‐culinegenderroles,asheportrayshimselfasdominantandincontrolofthesituation,but it isalsosexistsincehe“felt”his femalegroupmem‐bers “did not have the skills required” to complete the task. Anothermaleparticipantrespondedtothe“progressive”instructionwithasimi‐larexperience:

Inhighschool,Iwasonthelacrosseteam.Wewereinatiegamewithap‐proximatelythirtysecondsleft.Oneofmyteammatescheckedtheballlooseandpushedupthefield.Iwasonattackandhegavemethepass.Ibeatthegoalieone‐on‐oneastimeexpiredtowinthegame.Asmyteamrushedthefieldandtackledmetotheground, it feltgoodknowingmyteammatehadtheconfidenceinmetofinishthegame.

This experience also reflects traditionalmasculinity, as the partici‐pantdepictshimself as thehero in aphysical sport, inwhichhis teambeatsanotherteam.

Although themajority ofmale participants’ responses to the “pro‐gressive” instruction contained references to traditional masculinity,somemaleparticipantswereabletorecountexperienceswhichreflect‐edprogressivenotionsofmasculinity.Forexample,oneparticipantre‐countedthefollowingexperience:

Everyonepickedonthisoneobnoxiouskidinhighschool.Hewassoobnox‐iousinfact,thathehadhardlyanyfriends,andwasshunnedtheinstanthetriedtojoinininanything.SoIwouldgooutofmywaytotellpeopletoshutupwhentalkingbadabouthim,andwouldsupporthimifpeoplewerebe‐ingmeantohim.

Thisresponsereflectsaprogressivenotionofmasculinitybecausetheparticipantisactinginasupportiveandcaringway,andstandingupagainstbullying.Anothermaleparticipantsimilarlytookaprogressiveapproachbyhelpingandnurturingafriendemotionallythroughabreakup:


A friend of mine recently broke up with her boyfriend and was havingatoughtime.Shehadnoticedthathewashangingaroundanothergirl,whowasafriendofhers,veryfrequentlyandwasheartbrokenwhenshefoundoutthattheyhadbegun.Inoticedhowhardthiswasforherandwastheretoofferadviceandansweranyandallquestionsshehadaboutwhattodoorsayaroundherex‐boyfriendandmoreimportantlyherfriend.Weendedtalking a lot and any time shewas confused or frustrated, Iwas there tohelp.Wehavebecomeverygoodfriendsbecauseofthis.

Incomparisontomaleparticipants,82.5%offemaleparticipantsas‐signed to the “progressive” instruction condition recounted an experi‐encethatreflectedaprogressivenotionoffemininity,freeofanyrefer‐encestotraditionalfemininity.Theresultsofaχ²analysisrevealedthiseffect of participants’ gender on whether they were able to respondappropriately to the “progressive” condition as statistically significant,χ²(1,n=324)=51.94,p<.001(Figure1).Anexampleofafemalepar‐ticipant’sresponseinthe“progressive”conditionrecountedthefollow‐ingexperience:

ItoldmyfamilyIplanonhavingasuccessfulcareerbeforegettingmarried,soIdonothavetorelyonsomemanfinancially.

In thisexample, theparticipantvalues financial independence frommenandhavingherownprofessionalcareer.Anotherfemaleparticipantsimilarlyprovidedanexample involvingtherejectionofthetraditionalroleofneedingarelationshiptofeelcompleteormature:

Idon’thaveto lookbackfar.Asof today Iconsidermyselfa“progressive”woman. Iamsinglebychoice. Iamoftenflatteredbyvariousmenbutoptnot toget involvedinarelationship.Thismakesmeprogressivebecause Iam being independent and making my own rules about this thing calledfemininity.Ihavereachedanewlevelofmaturationinmywomanhood.Atthe club, I amno longer concerned about getting themost attention fromtheguys.

Research Question 2 asked how participants would respond whenaskedtorecountatimeintheirliveswhentheyhadactedtraditionallywithregardtotheirgender.Bothmenandwomenexposedtothe“real”instructionwere able to recount experiences that reflected traditionalgenderroles82%ofthetime(Figure1).Forexample,amaleparticipantexposedtothe“real”maninstructionconditionrecountedthefollowingexperience:


One time inwhich I felt as though I was a realmanwaswhen I got intoa fight with a classmate. Up until the fight, we were actually really goodfriends.InthefightIpunchedhimtwiceandblockedhisattemptatapunch,andIfeltasthoughIhadprovedmyselfinsomewaybecauseIwasalwaysskinny formyage.At thatmoment, I knew thatpeoplewould realize thatIwasnotonetobemessedwith.

This response contains references to control, dominance, and vio‐lence,allofwhicharetraditionalmasculinegenderroles.Anothermaleparticipant recounteda similarexperience involvingbothplaying foot‐ballandphysicalaggression:

IwonaphysicalfightwhenabunchofmyfriendsandthisnewkidIdidn’tknowwereplayingfootball.ThenewguypushedmewhenIaskedtoplay,andIpushedhimback.WhenhecameatmeagainIhithim...againandagainandagainuntilhestartedbleeding.Hewenthomecrying.

On theotherhand,a femaleparticipant in the“real”womancondi‐tionrecountedthefollowingexperience:

I felt likeawomanwhenIstarted livingwithmyboyfriendthispastsum‐mer,makingbreakfastforhimeverymorning.I felt likeatypicaldomestichousewifethatknewshewasresponsibleforcaringforherspouse.Iwouldwakeup20minutesearlierthanhim,getreadyforthedayandstartmakingbreakfast while he got ready for class. By the time he was ready, I hadbreakfastsetonthetable,hiskeysonthecounterandhisbackpackbythedoor. Many women would believe this task to be unnecessary, but I feltgreatknowingthatImadehismorningalittlebetterthanitnormallywouldbe.Whilehemadethebed, Iwashedthedishesandwaitedforhimbythedoor.At thatmoment, I felt likemygenderwasmoreapparent thanever.I haddoneevery ‘feminine’ chorepossible forhim tomakehis life easier,andfortunatelyitwasverymuchappreciated.

Thisresponsereferencesdomesticity,nurturance,anddeference tomen,allofwhicharetraditionalfemininegenderroles.Anotherwomaninthetraditionalconditionrecountedthefollowingexperienceinvolvingthetraditionalfemalegenderroleofcooking:

Idoenjoycookingandbakingforspecialpeopleinmylife,whichdoesmakemefeellikeawoman.Preparingaholidaymealotherscanenjoyissatisfy‐ingandusingrecipesfrommygrandmotherandmotherisalsoagreatfeel‐ingbecauseitisasthoughyouarekeepingthefamilyunittogether,whichisalsoawomanlydutytome.


Exploratory analyses

In addition to answering the original research questions, partici‐pants’ responses yielded some additional themes which emerged asa result ofpost‐hoc exploratory analyses attempting further to exploremen’s andwomen’s gender‐role experiences. For example, 31% of fe‐maleparticipantsrespondedtothe“real”womanpromptbyrecountingan experience in which the presence of secondary sex characteristics,suchasmenstruationorbreastdevelopment,madethemfeelasiftheywere“real”women.Forexample,afemaleparticipantinthe“real”wom‐anconditionrecountedthefollowingexperience:

I felt like I became a “real”womanwhen I gotmy firstmenstrual period.I feelas though thismakesyouawomanbecauseonlywomenexperiencethiscycle.Itistheonethingthatdistinguishesyoufromamaleanditshowsthatyouarematuringintoawoman.

Similarly,anotherparticipantwrote:

Iwouldsayanexperiencethatmademygendermoreapparenttomeper‐sonallywaswhenIwentbrashoppingforthefirsttime.Upuntilthatpoint,I had only felt like a girl. After Iwent bra shopping, I realized that Iwasgrowingupintoayoungwoman.

However, none of the male participants referenced secondary sexcharacteristicsinresponsetothe“real”manprompt.

Anothertrendthatemergedfromparticipants’responseswasrefer‐ence to competition. Male participants frequently (41%) referencedcompetitionandwhentheydid,exclusivelyreferencedcompetitionwithothermales.On theotherhand,58%of femaleparticipantsreferencedcompetition, ofwhich91%waswithmales and7%waswith females.For example, a female participant in the “progressive” condition refer‐encedcompetitionwithothermalesinthefollowingresponse:

Oneexperience Icanrecallvividly inwhich I feltempoweredasawomanwasduringanintensegameofHalo2.Althoughamaledominatedactivity,I was able to beat all the other boys in the video game. At thatmoment,IknewthatIhaddismantledaverycommonstereotype.

The results of a χ² analysis revealed a significant association be‐tween participant gender and whether or not participants referencedcompetitioninresponsetothepromptχ²(1,n=324)=4.94,p=.026.


Discussion

Inthisstudy,genderdifferencesemergedfromthequalitativeanalysesofparticipants’responsestogender‐roleinstructions.Manymalepartic‐ipants did not respond to the “progressive” man instruction in a waythat reflected progressive notions ofmasculinity, some female partici‐pantsrespondedtothe“real”womaninstructionbyreportingthedevel‐opmentofsecondarysexcharacteristics,andmorethanhalfofallfemaleparticipantsexposedtothe“progressive”womaninstructionreferencedcompetitionwithmales.

These findings suggested several important differences betweenmen’sandwomen’sunderstandingsofprogressiveandtraditionalgen‐der roles. Men in the progressive masculinity condition were largelyunable to recount experiences in their lives that made them feel asthough theywere “progressive”men. Conversely,womenwere able torespondappropriately to the“progressive” instruction,suggestingtheymayhavehadexistingdefinitionsorguidelinesofwhat itmeans tobeaprogressivewomanwhen theybeganresponding to theprompt.Thegenderdifferencesinparticipants’abilitiestorespondaccuratelytothepromptmaybe explained inpart by the lackofworkingdefinitionsofprogressivemasculinityinmainstreamsociety.

Menarecommonlyexposedtotraditionalnotionsofmasculinity,suchastherequirementtobetoughorunemotional,butmayrarelybeexposedtoprogressivenotions, such as the ability tobe emotional or nurturing.Conversely, women receive exposure to both traditional and nontradi‐tional forms of femininity inmodern culture, such as the plausibility ofbeing either a homemaker or a career‐woman. This is not to say thatwomenwho do not conform to traditional notions of femininity do notexperiencemarginalizationordiscriminationintheUnitedStates,becausesexismisstillprevalent.Additionally,thepresenceoftwodifferentfemi‐nineideologiescancreateadouble‐bindforwomen,inwhichsomewom‐enfeeltheneedtoactbothprogressivelyandtraditionallyinordertogainsocialacceptance.However,thefeministmovementmayprovideasenseofsupport forwomenwhoespouseanontraditional femininity,as femi‐nism actively promotes progressive femininity. Though there has beenacknowledgement in the literature of amale‐identity development pro‐cess(O’Neil&Egan,1992)andevenofacollectivemaleidentity(Wade&Gelso,1998),comparablesupporttowhatfeminismprovidesforwomen


islackingformen,thoughaprogressivemasculinitymovementmayhelpfillthegap.

Differencesinsociety’ssupportforvariousdefinitionsofmasculinityandfemininitymaystemfromthedifferencesinthehistoriesofthefem‐inistmovementandthemenandmasculinitymovement.Feministtheo‐ryandactionhasgainedmomentumsincethebeginningofthewomen’ssuffrage movement in the mid‐1840s (Freedman, 2007), whereas themenandmasculinitymovementdidnotgainmomentumuntilthemid‐1970s (Levant, 1996). Likewise, scholarshavebeen studying the femi‐nistmovementandthinkingaboutprogressivenotionsoffemininityfarlonger, as well. For example, psychological research on feminism hasbeen popular since the 1970s. Journals, such as Psychology ofWomenQuarterly and Feminism and Psychology, have been publishing articlesspecificallyfocusedonwomen’smentalhealthandissuesformorethan35 years. Division 35 of the American Psychological Association, theSocietyforPsychologyofWomen,wasestablishedin1975(Division35,2010). Conversely, psychological researchonmenandmasculinityhasonlybeenpopularsincetheearly1990s(Whorley&Addis,2006).Jour‐nalsdevotedtomenandmasculinityresearch,suchasMenandMascu‐linities and the Psychology ofMen andMasculinity, have only existedsincethelate1990s(Smiler,2004).Division51oftheAmericanPsycho‐logicalAssociation, the Society for thePsychological Study ofMen andMasculinity,wasfoundedin1995andgainedpermanentstatusin1997(Division 51, 2010). Although more research is being conducted onmen’sgenderroles,therelativenoveltyofthistypeofresearch,coupledwiththefactthatthusfarithasfocusedmostlyontraditionalmasculini‐ty,mayhaveresultedinonlylimitedawarenessofprogressivemasculin‐ity within mainstream culture. These facts may account for why fewmaleparticipantsinthisstudywereabletorecallexamplesofwhentheyhadenactedprogressivemasculinity.

Another interestingdifferenceinparticipants’responsestogender‐roleinstructionswasthepresenceofreferencestosecondarysexchar‐acteristics in response to the “real” woman instruction but not to the“real”maninstruction.Manyfemaleparticipantswrotethattheyhadfeltlikea“real”womanthedaytheyhadboughttheirfirstbras,inresponseto their breast development, or the day they had begunmenstruation.However,noneofthemaleparticipantsdescribedcorrespondingbiolog‐ical changes, such as the growth ofmuscles, or facial or chest hair, intheirresponses.


This findingmay be explained in several ways. First,mothers andother significant female role models often celebrate young women’spubertal development, such as bymaking a big deal about purchasinga first training bra, and thereforemake puberty salient. A part of thetraditional feminine gender role is to nurture and care for children(Crawford&Unger,2000;Gilbert&Scher,1999;Mahaliketal.,2005),soperhapswomenwhoareguidingyounggirlsthroughpubertyoffermoresupport for menstruation and breast development than men who areguiding young men through puberty. Women may celebrate signs ofpubertyindaughtersinawaythattheydonotdoforsons,orwhichsonsmightnotwelcomefromtheirmothers.Likewise,fathersandothermenalsomaybelesslikelytocelebrateyoungmen’spubertaldevelopment,perhapsbecausediscussingemotionsandbeingnurturingarenotpartoftraditionalmasculinegenderroles.Overtime,greaterarticulationandacceptance of progressive masculinity may result in a wider array ofacceptable responses by fathers to their sonswho are undergoing pu‐berty.Youngmenmayalsoreceivelessattentionforpubertymilestones,such as facial hair growth and voice deepeningbecause these changesoccurslowlyovertime,whereasmenstruationhasadefinitebeginning.Aperhaps comparableexperience formenwithadefinitebeginning issemenarche (Frankel, 2002; Stein & Reiser, 1994), though there hasbeenlittleresearchonwhethermenfeelthistobeamarkerofpubertyorofmasculinity.Additionally,theremaybeuniquepressureonmento“prove”masculinitythroughtraditionalbehaviors,whereaswomenmaybeperceivedasfeminineinpartbyvirtueoftheirphysicalappearance.

Asecondpotentialexplanation forgenderdifferences indescribingthedevelopmentof secondarysexcharacteristics is thatAmericancul‐tureplacesgreaterimportanceandvalueonfemalebodiesthanonmalebodies.Accordingtosexualobjectificationtheory,societysexuallyobjec‐tifieswomenasobjectsofsexualgratification,withlittleregardfortheirpersonality (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). Having a reproductivelymature female body may create vulnerability to sexual objectification(Fredrickson&Roberts,1997).Itisimportanttonotethatonlywomenparticipantsrespondingtothe“real”(traditional)instructionreferencedsecondarysexcharacteristics,whichsuggeststhatthesebodilychangeswerenotassociatedwithfemaleparticipants’conceptualizationofpro‐gressive femininity. Female participants may have been aware of in‐creased attention to theirpost‐pubertal femalebodiesbefore theyhadbegunpuberty,andthereforemayhavebeenwaitingtodevelopbreasts


andbeginmenstruatingbeforetheyhadallowedthemselvestoidentifyas“real”women.Lee(1994),inherqualitativestudyofwomen’snarra‐tivesabout theirbodies,similarlydiscussedmenarcheasamajorcom‐ponentofbodypoliticswherebygirls’identitydevelopmentasmaturingwomen during menarche overlaps with them being socialized to seetheirbodiesassexualobjects.

The lastmajor trend in participants’ free responses to the gender‐role instructions was the mention of competition. Almost half of themale participants referenced competition (regardless of instructioncondition),buttheyonlyreferencedcompetitionwithothermales.Thisfinding is consistent with traditional notions of masculinity, as domi‐nance,theneedforsuccess,andwinningareallintimatelylinkedtobothcompetitionand traditionalmasculinegender roles (e.g.Mahalik et al.,2003; Messner, 2002; O’Neil, 2008). The more surprising finding wasthatover90%offemaleparticipantswhoreferencedcompetitiondidsowith regard to competing with men. Additionally, female participantsonly referenced competitionwithmen in response toprogressivegen‐der‐role instructions. This finding suggests that some women definedprogressivefemininityatleastinpartasadherencetotraditionalmascu‐linity,perhapsasarejectionoforawell‐knownalternativetotraditionalfeminine gender roles. Somewomenmay feel the need to gain powerovermenortoclaimtraditionallyall‐malespacesandactivitiesinorderto identify as progressive women. Though women rarely referencedfemale‐female competition, the traditionality or progressiveness ofthosetypesofresponsesdependsonthecontext.Forexample,compet‐ingwithothermothersataschoolbakesaletohavethebestcupcakescouldbeconsidered traditional,butcompetingwithother femalebusi‐nessexecutivesatacompanytoyieldthemostcompanyprofitscouldbeconsideredprogressive.

Limitations and future research

Despitetheinsightsgeneratedbyparticipants’identificationofper‐sonal examples conforming to traditional and progressive notions ofgender in this study, it does have several limitations, and as a result,directions for future research.One limitationwas theuseof the terms“progressive” and “real,” asopposed to “progressive” and “traditional,”inprimingparticipantstodescribetheirgenderedexperiences.Howev‐


er,theanalysesconfirmedthatbothmaleandfemaleparticipantsinthe“real”conditionunderstoodthat“real”meant“traditional,”andpartici‐pants of both genderswere able to recount situations in their lives inwhichtheyhadfeltasthoughtheyhadbeen“real”menorwomen.Maleparticipants may not have had a deep understanding of progressivemasculinity,asrelativelyfewwereabletoprovideexamplesfromtheirownlivesofit.Ontheotherhand,perhapsmenunderstoodtheterm,buthad few life examples inwhich they had truly acted progressively. Or,a social desirability bias may have affected participants’ responses(whichwasnotassessedforinthisstudy).Somemenmayhaverecalledexampleswhentheyhadbehavedprogressively,butfeltuncomfortablereportingthosememoriesforfearofalackofacceptanceofthosebehav‐iorsbyothers.Futureresearchshouldteaseapartthesourceofthedif‐ferenceinwomen’sandmen’sunderstandingandreportingofprogres‐sive notions of their own gender, in addition to using the terms“traditional”and“progressive,”perhapsinpartbycontrollingforsocialdesirability.

Anothersampling‐relatedpotentiallimitationofthisstudyistheex‐clusiveuseofcollegians.Thevastmajorityofparticipantswerebetween18and22yearsold(onlythreeindividualsidentifiedasolderthan22).Theyouthfulnatureofthesampleraisesthequestionofwhetherexperi‐encesoftheseyoungadultsarerepresentativeofpeopleofallages.Old‐er individualsmayhavemorecareerexperiences, child‐rearingexperi‐ences,andromanticrelationshipsuponwhichtodrawwhenrespondingtotheinstruction.Thisgreaterexperiencebase,inturn,mayaffecttheirlevelsofgender‐roleconformity.Inaddition,themesthatemergedfromthe data, such as competition created via playing sports and academicachievement, may not be mirrored in experiences of older adults. Ifamoreinclusivesamplehadbeenrecruitedwithregardtoparticipants’ages,different themesmayhaveemergedatdifferent age strata in theanalyses. This concern mirrors one expressed by O’Neil, Good, andHolmes(1995),foundthatmenatdifferentagesandlifestagesshoweddifferent patterns in gender role conflict. However, these authors re‐portednoevidence to suggest a simpleoverall increaseordecrease inmen’sgenderroleconflictacrossthelifespan.

Another methodological limitation to this study involved that factthatthoughthejudgescodedthedataindependentlyandwereblindtoparticipantcondition,theybothknewthestudy’sresearchquestions,aswell as the gender of participants because of theneed for appropriate


coding.Thisstudydidnothaveanyapriorihypotheses,sohypothesescouldnothaveinfluencedcoding,butnonethelessastrongermethodol‐ogycouldhaveinvolvedtheuseofjudgeswhowereblindtothestudy’sresearch questions in addition to being blind to participant condition.However,itwouldnothavebeenpossibletoblindjudgestoparticipantgenderbecausetheresponsesthemselvescontainedgendercues.

Though this article provided a working definition of progressivemasculinity,thetermstillneedstoberefined,aswellasfurtheropera‐tionalized through the creation of scales thatmeasure individuals’ es‐pousal of and adherence to progressive masculinity. Further refining,researching,andtherebypromotingtheadoptionofprogressivemascu‐linitymayhelpmenreconstructtheirmasculinityinmoreadaptableandeffective ways. These could include improving their receptiveness topsychotherapy,theirmentalhealth,andthehealthoftheirpersonalrela‐tionships. The construct must also be further distinguished from andcompared to other forms of masculinity, such as Kiselica and Englar‐Carlson’s (2010) and Hammer and Good’s (2010) concept of positiveaspectsoftraditionalmasculinity.

Further refining the literature’s understanding of progressivemas‐culinitycouldalsooccurthroughresearch thatexaminesmen’sexperi‐enceswith progressivemasculinity. In the current study,male partici‐pants’ responses to the “progressive” instruction suggest that anunderstandingofprogressivemasculinitymaynotbepervasiveinmain‐streamculture.Futureresearchshouldtakeamoreinductiveapproach,comparingthecurrentdefinitiontothoseofcommunitysamplesofpar‐ticipants.Thiscouldinvolvein‐depthandexclusiveexaminationsofpro‐gressive themes thatemergeanddonotemerge in themen’spersonalaccounts of their own behaviors, values, and identities, andwhat con‐texts influence those constructs to alignwith progressivemasculinity.For example, men may be more likely to espouse progressive beliefswheninthepresenceofotherprogressivemenorwomen,afindingthatcouldhaveconcrete implications for interventionsto increaseprogres‐siveness.Additionally,becausetheterm“progressive”maymeansome‐thingdifferenttomenandwomen,furthercomparisonsbetweenmen’sandwomen’sconceptualizationsoftheconstructcouldprovefruitful.

Thoughtheresearch literaturehasexploredmanyaspectsof tradi‐tionalmasculinity,perhapsoneofthenextfrontiersinthestudyofmenand masculinity involves forging new alternatives toward which menwho shun traditional, restrictive, and at times sexist gender roles can


move. Progressivemasculinity, though shown in this study to be as ofyetmisunderstoodinmainstreamcultureandperhapseveninthescien‐tific literature,may hold promise for an expansion ofwhatmanymenseeastheironlychoicesformasculinity.

Acknowledge

WewouldliketothankKimberlyD.Jonesforprovidingthedataandmakingthoughtfulcommentsonearlyversionsofthepaper.

REFERENCES

ALLEN,L. (2007) “Sensitive andRealMachoAll at the SameTime”:Younghetero‐sexualmenandromance.MenandMasculinities.10.pp.137–152.

ARCINIEGA, G.M. et al. (2008)Toward a fuller conceptionofmachismo:Develop‐ment of a traditionalmachismo and caballerismo scales. JournalofCounselingPsychology.55.pp.19–33.

BARGAD,A.&HYDE, J.S. (1991)Women’sstudies:Astudyof feminist identityde‐velopmentinwomen.PsychologyofWomenQuarterly.15.pp.181–201.

BRANNON,R.&JUNI,S.(1984)Ascaleformeasuringattitudestowardsmasculinity.JSASCatalogueofSelectedDocumentsinPsychology.14(6).

CAHILL,S.&MUSSAP,A.J.(2007)Emotionalreactionsfollowingexposuretoideal‐izedbodiespredictsunhealthybodychangeattitudesandbehaviors inwomenandmen.JournalofPsychosomaticResearch.62.pp.631–639.

CRAWFORD,M.&UNGER,R.(2000)Womenandgender:Afeministpsychology.Bos‐ton,MA:McGraw‐Hill.

CONNELL,R.W.&MESSERSCHMIDT,J.W.(2005)Hegemonicmasculinity:Rethink‐ingtheconcept.Gender&Society.19.pp.829–859.

DAVID, D. S. &BRANNON, R. (1976)The forty‐ninepercentmajority:Themale sexrole.Reading,MA:Addison‐Wesley.

DAVIES,J.A.,SHEN‐MILLER,D.S.&ISACCO,A.(2010)Themen’scenterapproachtoaddressing the health crisis of college men. Professional Psychology: ResearchandPractice.41.pp.347–354.

Division35,AmericanPsychologicalAssociation(2010)TheSocietyforthePsycholo‐gyofWomen.[Online].Availablefrom:http://www.apadivisions.org/division‐35/[Accessed:10thNovember2014].

Division51,AmericanPsychologicalAssociation(2010)TheSocietyforthePsycho‐logicalStudyofMenandMasculinity.AmericanPsychologicalAssociation.[Online].Availablefrom:http://www.division51.org/aboutus/history.htm[Accessed:10thNovember2014].

FISCHER, A. R. et al. (2000) Assessing women’s identity development: Studies ofconvergent,discriminant,andstructuralvalidity.PsychologyofWomenQuarterly.24.pp.15–29.


FRANKEL, L. (2002) “I’ve never thought about it”: Contradictions and taboos sur‐rounding American males’ experiences of first ejaculation (semenarche). TheJournalofMen’sStudies.11.pp.37–54.

FREDRICKSON, B. L. & ROBERTS, T. (1997) Toward understandingwomen’s livedexperiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 21.pp.173–206.

FREEDMAN,E.B.(2007)TheEssentialFeministReader.NewYork:RandomHouse,Inc.GILBERT,L.A.&SCHER,M.(1999)GenderandSexinCounselingandPsychotherapy.

NeedhamHeights,MA:Allyn&Bacon.HAMMER,J.H.&GOOD,G.E.(2010)PositivePsychology:Anempiricalexamination

ofbeneficialaspectsofendorsementofmasculinenorms.PsychologyofMen&Masculinity.11.pp.303–318.

HAMMOND,W.P.&MATTIS,J.S.(2005)Beingamanaboutit:Constructionsofmas‐culinity among African American men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity. 6.pp.114–126.

KISELICA,M.S.&ENGLAR‐CARLSON,M.(2010)Identifying,affirming,andbuildingupon male strengths: The positive psychology/positive masculinity model ofpsychotherapy with boys and men. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice,Training.47.pp.276–287.

KISELICA,M.S.etal.(2008)APositivePsychologyPerspectiveonHelpingBoys.In:Kiselica,M.S.,Englar‐Carlson,M.&Horne,A.M.(eds.)CounselingTroubledBoys:AGuidebookforPractitioners.NewYork:Routledge.

LEE,J.(1994)Menarcheandthe(hetero)sexualizationofthefemalebody.Gender&Society.8.pp.343–362.

LEVANT,R.F.(1996)Thenewpsychologyofmen.ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice.27.pp.259–265.

LEVANT,R.F.&FISCHER,J.(1998)TheMaleRoleNormsInventory.In:Davis,C.M.,Yarber,W.H., Bauserman, R., Schreer, G.&Davis, S. L. (eds.)Sexuality‐relatedMeasures:ACompendium.NewburyPark,CA:Sage.

LEVANT,R.F.&RICHMOND,K.(2007)Areviewofresearchonmasculinitiesideolo‐giesusingtheMaleRoleNormsInventory.JournalofMen’sStudies.15.p.130

MAHALIK, J. R. et al. (2003) Development of the Conformity to Masculine NormsInventory.PsychologyofMenandMasculinity.4.pp.3–25.

MAHALIK, J. R. et al. (2005) Development of the Conformity to Feminine NormsInventory.SexRoles.52.pp.417–435.

MESSNER,M.A.(1992)LikeFamily:Power,Intimacy,andSexualityinMaleAthletes’Friendships.In:Nardi,P.M.(ed.)Men’sFriendships.ThousandOaks,CAUS:SagePublications,Inc.

MORGAN, B. L. (1996) Putting the feminism into feminism scales: Introduction ofaLiberalFeministAttitudeandIdeologyScale.SexRoles.34.pp.359–390.

O’NEIL,J.M.(2008)Summarizing25yearsofresearchonmen’sgender‐roleconflictusing theGenderRoleConflictScale:Newresearchparadigmsandclinical im‐plications.CounselingPsychologist.36.pp.358–445.

O’NEIL,J.M.&EGAN,J.(1992)Men’sandWomen’sGenderRoleJourneys:Metaphorfor Healing, Transition, and Transformation. In: Wainrib, B. R. (ed.), GenderIssuesAcrosstheLifeCycle.NewYork:Springer.


O’NEIL,J.M.,GOOD,G.E.&HOLMES,S.(1995)FifteenYearsofTheoryandResearchonMen’sGenderRoleConflict:NewParadigms forEmpiricalResearch. In:Le‐vant,R.&Pollack,W.(eds.)TheNewPsychologyofMen.NewYork:BasicBooks.

O’NEIL,J.M.etal.(1986)GenderRoleConflictScale:Collegemen’sfearoffemininity.SexRoles.14.pp.335–350.

POMPPER,D. (2010)Masculinities, themetrosexual, andmedia images:Across di‐mensionsofageandethnicity.SexRoles.63.pp.682–696.

RICKARD,K.M.(1987)Feministidentitydevelopment:Scaledevelopmentandinitialvalidationstudies.PaperpresentedattheConferenceofAssociationforWomeninPsychology.Denver,CO,March1987.

SABIK,N.J.&TYLKA,T.L.(2006)Dofeministidentitystylesmoderatetherelation‐ship between perceived sexist events and disordered eating? Psychology ofWomenQuarterly.30.pp.77–84.

SMILER,A.(2004)Thirtyyearsafterthediscoveryofgender:Psychologicalconceptsandmeasuresofmasculinity.SexRoles.50.pp.15–26.

STEIN, J.H.&REISER,L.W. (1994)Astudyofwhitemiddle‐classadolescentboys’responses to “semenarche” (the first ejaculation). Journal of Youth & Adoles‐cence.23.pp.373–384.

TIGGEMANN,M.(2006)Theroleofmediaexposureinadolescentgirls’bodydissat‐isfactionanddriveforthinness:Prospectiveresults.JournalofSocialandClinicalPsychology.25.pp.523–541.

TOLMAN,D.L.&PORCHE,M.V. (2000)TheAdolescentFemininity IdeologyScale:Development and validationof a newmeasure for girls.PsychologyofWomenQuarterly.24.pp.365–376.

WADE, J. C. & GELSO, C. J. (1998) Reference Group Identity Dependence Scale:Ameasureofmaleidentity.TheCounselingPsychologist.26.pp.384–412.

WETHERELL,M.&EDLEY,N.(1999)Negotiatinghegemonicmasculinity:Imaginarypositionsandpsycho‐discursivepractices.Feminism&Psychology.9.pp.335–356.

WHORLEY,M.R.&ADDIS,M.E.(2006)TenyearsofpsychologicalresearchonmenandmasculinityintheUnitedStates:Dominantmethodologicaltrends.SexRoles.55.pp.649–658.

WONG,Y.J.etal.(2010)ContentanalysisofPsychologyofMen&Masculinity(2000to2008).PsychologyofMen&Masculinity.11.pp.170–182.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

JaremaDrozdowiczAdam Mickiewicz University in Poznan (Poland)

Black heroes and heroines in cinema. Representations of Afro-American identities

in the “Blaxploitation” movies

ABSTRACT.ThecinematicgenreofBlaxploitation isasignificantexampleofhowthepopularcultureinfluencescertainidentitypatterns.Inthiscasethethisrelationisbeingexaminedonthe issueofcontemporaryAfro‐Americanidentities.Thispaperattemptstoanswertheques‐tion of the mechanism of identity construction in the context of newmedia, and cinema inparticular.ThustheBlaxploitationmoviesarebeingregardedhereasaphenomenonwhichisinlargeextenttypicalforotheridentityconstructionsinthecontextofaglobalculturalchangeoccurringinthelastdecadesintheWest.

KEYWORDS:Blaxploitation,cinema,Afro‐Americanidentities,popularculture,blackness

The cultural constructions of identity

Whenwespeakofmodern(orpostmodern)dayidentities,weusual‐ly include in our views the image of a cluster; a complex constructionmade by our life experience, knowledge, or socio‐cultural factors. It’sbuildingaconsistentwholeoutofbitsofvariouscontent,notnecessarilylogical intheirparticularcharacter,butusuallycoherentenoughtothepeoplewho share them. It is a specific construction of needs, desires,andmeans to achieve them through agency in a socio‐cultural contextwecurrentlylivein.Theconstructiveapproachtowardsbuildingtheselfisthereforethemostpopularamongidentitytheories.Accordingtothemost of them, the process of constructing one’s identity is a slow, butsteady ongoing mechanism of acceptance and rejection in relation toselected elementsof the socio‐culturalmilieu.However, thisphenome‐non of identities emerging from the processes of social, economic orpoliticalemancipationinthe1960’shasbeenmadebyasteadyandcon‐stant flowof certain elements,whichdidnot fit quitewell intonormsand values of Western societies in terms of high culture, elitarism or

60 JAREMA DROZDOWICZ

bourgeoisie morality. However, the widespread acceptance of thoseelements throughproliferationofanewculturalstandardhadcontrib‐utedtothe legitimizationofpop‐cultureas thebasis for identitybuild‐ing. These new pop‐cultural identities are hybrid in their nature anddynamicintheirsocialplacement.Theyattractnowadaysattentionfrommanyscholarsandbecomeanobjectofstudywithinvariousdisciplines.Simultaneously they strive for the creating a new scientific approach,whichwould be able to grasp the quickly changing object and deliverasatisfyinganswertothequestiononthenatureofcontemporaryWest‐ern societies and culture, aswell the place of the self in interpersonalrelations structuring the social system. Such a new approach is oftenassociatedwiththeAnglo‐Saxontraditionofculturalstudiesrepresent‐edbyStuartHall,or JohnFiske,buton theotherhandcultural studiesbecamewith the passing years also a fashionable excuse for a lack ofconfidenceintraditionalresearchmethodsinthestudyofculture.Nev‐ertheless, constructivismof cultural studies remains today as a one ofthemostsignificantapproachestowardstheproblemofmodernidenti‐ties,especiallyinthecontextoftheinfluenceofnewmediaandcinemaonthewayweseeourselves.

Socialconstructivisminidentitytheorytacklesinthefirstplacetheprocess of identity building. Themanifestations of identities are beingpresented mostly as an emanation of this process or a specific post‐processingoftheidentityimageinthelaboratoryofsociologyandotherhumanities.Puttingidentityintopractice(andtheinclusionofthesocialpraxistheoryingeneral)wasforalongperiodoftimeofsecondaryim‐portance tomajor figures in the study of self identification, likeHenriTajfel, the father of the social identity approach.His theory of identityhasbeen focusedon the cognitive aspect of identity construction—theemergenceofaspecific innerspacethroughrelationswithothermem‐bers of our own group and other groups. For Tajfel, as well for JohnTurner, identitywas a constantly changingmirror of the social realitysurroundingtheself.Theirapproachlimitedhoweveridentitytoanob‐ject of manipulation from the side of outer factors, i.e. society. Bothscholarswere convinced of the importance of this social determinism.Individualswereput intoa frameworkof institutions,norms,valuesatthe same time stripped from their agency and role in creating whatmakessocietywork.

Ofcoursethepictureofidentitypresentedhereisastrictconstruc‐tiveone,althoughitisbysometakenforgranted.Itslimitationslieupon

Black heroes and heroines in cinema 61

the assumption, or more upon a reduction to the imaginary sphere,whichisbeingoftendetachedfromtherealitysurroundingtheoriginalphenomena and shifting towards the ideological field. The strict con‐structivistsapproachisthereforeareductiontoacertainimageofiden‐tity,neglecting theaspectofrelationsofselfwithothersubjects.Somecritiquesoftheconstructivistsapproachsaythat,cultureisbeingtreat‐edhereassomething,whichisfallsintothedebateontheoppositionofthe natural and cultural order, immediately taking the position on thesideofculturepushingoutsidethedebatewhatisbelongingtobiology.On the other hand the arguments of non‐constructivists also tend topush the discussion onto the field of modernity/post‐modernity issueand simultaneously reject the importance of the symbolic turn, whichbecame visible on a global scale few decades back. These, and othersimilarpolemicsonsocio‐culturaldynamicsoftodayseemtodominatethe current debates.What becomes important in the condition of con‐temporary reality is the fact, thatbothmentionedapproaches take thephenomenonofmodernidentitiesastheirobjectofstudyinthecontextof the crisis of traditional self‐identification patterns delivered by thesocietyandculture.

Afro-Americans and the critical trajectories of modernity

It’squitecleartoday,thatthedebateontheculturalcrisisofmoder‐nityandculturalcritiqueemergedfromthatdiscoursestartedtospreadacross theWestern hemisphere in the 1950’s. It was a time of a newconfrontationafterWorldWar II.This time itwasaclashnotbetweennations, but the old generation perceived by the youth as an embodi‐mentof conservatism, falsemoralityorvarious ideologies,whichwerereproduced by the existing order tomaintain the socio‐political statusquooftherulingclass.MostlyintheUnitedStatesandWesternEurope,thepostulatesof theFrankfurtSchoolofsociologypointedoutdirectlytheexistenceofasignificantgapbetweenwasisnowandwhatwasbackthen, inthetimesofgrandideasandphilosophicalnarratives.TheodorAdorno’sandMaxHorkhiemer’sDialecticsofEnlightenmenthadadeepimpactonthemindsofyoungpeopleinacademiccampusesfromBerke‐leytoColumbia.Thesignificanceofthecriticalapproach,whichemergedamongscholarsandintellectualshadontheotherhadlessinfluenceon


whatwashappeningon the streetsofAmericanmetropolis. Social andpoliticalunrest, liketheChicagoriotsin1968aftertheassassinationofMartinLutherKingortheeventsinthesouthpartofthecountryregard‐ingtheactionsagainstracialsegregation,hadshownthatthetimewasright foradeepmakeoverofAmerica’sportraitas the landof the free.Theconflictbetweengenerationsthusbecamealsoaconflictofthetra‐ditionalviewonculture,withitsemphasisoneliteandhighculture,andthecounter‐culturalmovementswhich literallyexploded inthe1960’s.ThisphenomenonwasespeciallyvisibleinthetransgressionsrelatedtoAmerican culture and society.United States became thus the center oftheseprocesses,andmajorAmericancities likeNewYorkorSanFran‐ciscowereperceivedbymanyasaspecificaxismundiofthenewworldtocome.Inthe1960’sAmericawasontheedgeofaculturalandsocialrevolution.Everyonewas supposed tobemadeapartof these revolu‐tionarymovementsandsomeofAmericanradicalorganizations,likeforexample the leftist urban guerilla The Weather Underground, hadbrought literally the war in Vietnam back home into American livingrooms, streets and cities. American societywas in turmoil and no onecould turn back the clock again. Nevertheless the social aspect of thisshift (inastructuralsense)wasnotchanging inthesamespeedas theculturalone.Americansocietywasreluctantinacceptingtheideaspos‐tulatedbyyouthsubcultures,humanrightsactivists,liberalintellectualsororganizationsfightingfortherightsofvariousminorities. Inthelastcase, the mentioned reluctance was most of all related to the blackAmericans.Ontheotherhand,theAfro‐Americanmovementgainedthestrongest influence among all movements of social discontent in thattimeandgavetheprocessofchangetheneededmomentum.

Afro‐Americanculturewasforalongperiodoftimeboundbydeeplyrootedviewsof thealleged inferiorityof theBlackMan.Blacknesswasnotjustskincolor,butalsoastateofboth—cultureandnature.Thera‐cialdiscourseinAmericahaditstiesnotonlytoracismunderstoodasanideologyandsocialpraxis,butalsotothescientificdiscourseintheso‐cialsciences.Theworksof famousAmericanscholars, like forexampleFranzBoas,werefocusedondeliveringtheanswertotheroleofraceinthe determination of all other aspects being. Boas was in this contextapioneerwhen it comes to thereconsiderationof racemoreasacon‐ceptappliedbypeople toacertainpatternofhumanbehaviorand theway people look, then a objectified determinant of intellectual compe‐tences.Boasiananthropologycontributedtoaclearbreakthroughinthe


fieldofstudyofrace,presentingtoawideraudiencehowtroublesomeisthedatausedbymanytogroundtheirownhypothesesonthelesserintel‐lectualpotentialofBlacks.Inhisworks,Boashadappliedanewapproachtowards race and culture. Thisnewacademic lenses focusedon the cri‐tiqueofracialformalismandracismasanideologypresentinpubliclife.AsGeorgeStockingstates,Boaswasfacedthismatterwithastrongoppo‐sition,both inacademiccirclesasdangerous instigatorofchangeandasaGerman‐Jewish immigrant in the still formingAmerican society of theearly20thcentury(see:Stocking,1982).However,hiscommitmenttothedismantlingtheexistingracialprejudiceandracismbasedonpseudosci‐entificbasisofphysicalanthropologyisstillregardedasoneofthemostimportantturningpointsintheAmericanracialdiscourse.

CertainlyBoas’s contributionhadastrong impacton the intellectualdebateswithintheacademia,butwhenitcomestoabroadereffectithadlittlesignificanceineffectivechangingthesocialsystem.Americansocietywas(andinsomeextentstillis)basedonracialdifferences,ormorepre‐ciselyontakingraceintoaccountwhenitcomestodrawingalineofinnerdifferentiationwithin theAmerican society. Racial prejudice and racismitselfisstill,astherecenteventsshow,apartoftheAmericancontempo‐rarysocial,cultural,legal,politicalandsometimeseveneconomicdebates.AgoodexampleofthispresenceisthecaseofaHarvardUniversitypro‐fessorHenryLouisGatesJr.,afamousAfro‐AmericantheoristofraceandaspecialistinAmericancultureandliterature.In2009hewasarrestedinhisownhomebyawhiteBostonpoliceofficer,whodidn’tbelievedthatGatescouldownsuchanexpensivehouse inawealthyneighborhoodofBoston and had to be a burglar, who had just entered the premises tocommitacrime.ThewholepublicdebateregardingtheGatescase,involv‐ing the president Barrack Obama, had contributed in the last years toa new interest in race as an important problem in the contemporaryAmerican society, who’s foundations lie upon the idea of equality andappreciationofthecategoryofdifference.

Cinema as crucial instrument in the identity’s toolbox

Wehavetofacethereforethequestion,ifthepoliticalachievementsofthe1950’sandthe1960’sdidchangetheAmericansocietyinthewayMartin Luther King had dreamt of? Or is still contemporary America


boundby itsownstrugglewithrace?Theanswer to thisquestionmaylay upon a certain aspect of the American pop‐culture, specifically itscinematographic part. American cinemawas always in some sense aninstrumentformeasuringthesocialtendenciesinthiscountry.Bylook‐ingatitsmostpopularcurrentsandthehistoryofitsgenresweareableto reconstruct various socio‐cultural contexts surrounding the transi‐tionstheAmericansocietyhadundergonethroughoutthe20thcentury.Popularculture,andcinemainparticular,maybetreatedhereasaspe‐cificreflectionofwhatisimportantinthepublicdiscourse,althoughthismirroroftheAmericansocietyisnotalwaysaccurate.Itismoreanem‐phasized imageof thecomplexmapofpathsandwaysAmericansdealwithsocial,politicalandculturalissuesintermsoffilmfiction,literatureor comics. Serious political topics and problems making the basis forpopularmoviesareoftentakeninanonseriousmanner,throughcome‐dy and laughter, outside the elite and high culture esthetics, throughkitschyimagesappealingtotheviewermorethanhighbrowintellectualdebates.

Asraceandracismbecamesuchanissuecinemarespondedwithoutanyhesitationtothispop‐culturalcalltoarms.Afro‐Americanswereoneofthemostsignificantgroupscontributinginthe1960’stothecinematicrevolution.Actually,theywerethefirstminoritygroupintheUSA,whichhad gained widespread attention in the public sphere thanks to theirinfluenceofthenewmedia,i.e.cinemaandtelevision.Newmediatech‐nology,whichproliferatedafter1945,hadestablishedalsoanewwayofseeing things, including the picture of the rapidly changing Americansociety.ThefilmindustryandHollywoodrespondedquicklywithmov‐ies focusing on the younger generation and its problemswithmovieslike Nicholas Ray’s “Rebel Without a Cause”. As a conclusion the realproblemwas, thatthesepicturesweredealingwithissuesappealingtowhite young people living in a wealthy and quiet suburbia of majorAmericancities.Movies,madeunderthecontrolofbigproductionstudi‐os,wereperceivedbymanyAfro‐Americansasaprolongedarmof thewhitemiddle class. The plots and characters portrayed in this kind ofDisneylikecinemahardlytackledtheproblemsimportantfortheblackcommunity.Theseweretwoworldswhichcouldnotbebroughttogeth‐erbyanymeans;andwhenaccidentallytheydid,therelationsbetweenthemwere based on oldworldviews, fears and stereotypes from bothsidesalike.


The cinematic image of Afro-Americans and it’s dynamics

Thetraditionalimageofpeopleofcolorwasforalongperiodoftimeset inatraditionoftheuneducatedandoftensillyblackmaid; just likethe character ofMammy played by HattieMacDaniel inGonewith thewind (1939). Mammywas a cliché figure formany representations ofblacknessinearlyAmericancinema.ItrepresentedtheAfro‐Americans,aswelltheexotic“other”inmoregeneralterms(Sims,2006,p.31).Shewas an universal and symbolic persona of the blackwomen andmenworking inmanyAmericanhouseholdsononehand, andon theothershepersonified the superiority ofwhite culture and its ability to tamethesavageinstinctsofthose,whodidn’tbelongtothewhiteupperclassowningthefilmindustry.ThissituationwascharacteristictoAmericancinemauntilthehalfofthe20thcentury.Inthe1950’sblackactorsap‐pearinginthesemainstreammoviesweregivenusuallysupportingrolesof minor significance. Nevertheless, cinema changed as the Americansociety had undergone slow, but steady transition into the age of theconflictinIndochinaandstudent’srevolts.PeoplelikeforexampleHarryBelafonteandSidneyPoitier,werecertainlynewtothewhiteaudience,andmovies likeCarmen Jones (1954) inwhich theBizet’sCarmenwasplaced in the contextof theAmericanSouthandall actorswereblack,wereasmallstepintherightdirection.Alsotheportraitoftheblacksinthismoviehadwitnessedaradicalmakeover,possiblyshockingtosomethrough itsextensive sensuality.Thenewgenerationofmoviemakers,whichcame into thespotlight in the1960’s,hadshifted the interestoftheAmerican film industrymore towards thevoicesof theyesterday’smarginalizedandexploited.ThusAfro‐Americanswereput in themid‐dleofthecinematographicdiscourseinthedecadeoftheDenisHopper’sEasyRider (1969) andArthur Penn’sBonnieandClyde (1967).Moviesmadebythemwereamanifestooftheblackvoiceinpolitical,socialandculturalterms.

Socialandinstitutionalcontestation,culturalrebellionandcivicdis‐obediencewasnewtomanyfollowersofTimothyLearyandreadersofJack Keruac’s On the Road, but very much familiar to most Afro‐Americans.Theideasof theblackemancipationmovementwere inthe1960’s ranging from methods of peaceful disobedience (for examplethrough so called “sit ins” in public sphere and occupation of certaininstitutions),throughreligiousawaking(theNationofIslam),tomilitant


urban guerilla (like the Black Panthers organization). These variousformsofagencyhadonethingincommon.ThesituationofAfro‐Ameri‐canshad to change immediately and the actionsof black activists, likeMalcomXanothers,weresupposedtogainsupportofthewholeblackcommunityintheUnitedStates,aswellattractsupportersamongdemo‐craticandliberalwhites.TheidentitiessharedbyAfro‐Americansinthattimewere also undergoing important changes. Their self‐identificationstartedtoleavetheimageofformerslaves,or lowskilledfarmandcarfactoryworkers inMississippiandDetroit,andmovedontothefieldofpolitical activism, education and economic success. This wide spreadchangeinthewayblackAmericanshadlookedattheirownplaceintheAmerican societywas common by the end of 1960’s. The next decadebelongedtotheAfro‐AmericanvoiceinAmericancinema,andthisvoicewastobeheardnotjustinbigcitiesghettos,butalsointhewhitesuburbia.Bytheyear1970being“Black”becamenotjustasignofethnicmargin‐alizationandtheneedforemancipation,butitalsobecamefashionable.Fromnow on, a certain feeling of coolness has been attached to Afro‐American culture, and cinema has adopted it through its language ofimages. More and more movies were dealing with the phenomena ofanewAfro‐Americanidentity.Thebestexampleofhowcinematicexpe‐rience had dealt with this issue is being provided by the genre of socalled“Blaxploitation”movies.

Thepopularity of “Blaxploitation” cinema in the1970’s is truly re‐markable,whenwetakeintoaccountthefact,thatthroughmostofthetimeof it’spresenceitalwayswasandstill isrelatedtoAfro‐Americanidentities.Ononehandthesourceofthispopularitymaylayinthehis‐torical context of thewider transgression ofAmerican identity in gen‐eral. On the other hand, the “Blaxploitation” genre is verymuch aliveeventodaybecauseofitsspecificconventionhowtomakemovies.Mostofthe“Blaxploitation”moviesweremadeoutsideHollywood,oroutsideitssystemoflargestudiosandproductionfirms.Theyalmostneverhadabigbudget,orexpensivespecialeffects.Thismoviemaking“frombe‐low”issignificant inunderstandinghowthisgenreaffectedtheAmeri‐can cinema in the 1980’s and 1990’s; sometimes even reaching backexplicittothe“Blaxploitation”tradition,likeinthecaseofQuentinTar‐antino’s JackieBrown (1997).Movies, likefamousShaft (1971)byGor‐donParkshadsetastrictcodeforthiskindofcinemainrelationtothemethodsused,thewayhowtheplotisbeingnarrated,howthecharac‐tersarebeingpresentedandwhotheyare,orwhattypesofsub‐genres


ituses.“Blaxploitation”cinemausedsuchconventionslikefilmnoirandclassic crimemovies,westerns, actionandmartial artsmovies, horror,comedyandhistoricaldrama;sometimesmixingallofthemintoanewlanguagehowthestoryisbeingtoldonthescreen.Theunconventionali‐tyoftheapproachofAfro‐Americanmoviemakersandthecommercialsuccess of their pictures has challenged in the same extent themain‐streamfilmindustryandthesocialandpoliticalstatusquo.

Blaxploitation genre as a representation of black identities

The1970’swerethebelleépoqueof“Blaxploitation”styleinfilmandculture.Atthesametimethisgenreincluded(inthefilmsmadeaccord‐ing to its unique structure) all the trashy facets of this decade, amongothersover‐exposedestheticsofpop‐art, camp in fashion,discomusic,andglitter.Ithadputalloftheseelementsintosocialandpoliticaltermsof resistanceand rejectionof culturedominatedbywhiteswith its es‐thetic evaluation ofwhat is art andwhat is kitsch. The opposition be‐tweenblacknessandwhitenessvisibleinthesemoviesissimultaneouslyalinedrawnbetweentheunderclasspeopleofcolorandmiddleorup‐per class elites. It’s not surprising, that a large number of charactersportrayed in “Blaxploitation” movies is shown as underdogs fightingtheirway,often inaviolentmanner,up thesocialstructure.Gangstersand shady entrepreneurs, pimps, drug dealers and petty criminals arepopulatingthescreeninfilmslikeSuperFly(1972),BlackCeasar(1972),HitMan (1972) or Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song (1971). Moraldoubtsregardingtheirappearanceandtheviolentandcriminalwayoflivingarebeingdiminishedby thegoal theyallattempt toachieve—towinthestrugglefortheprideofBlackManandthegreatergoodofthelocal Afro‐American community. The evil and the wicked are in mostcasesthewhites—corruptpoliceofficersandpoliticiansorconservativebusinessmen with racist views. The monochrome morality had to beclearand thedominanceofwhiteswas supposed tobeoverthrownbystreetjustice.

What was unjust was the social system Afro‐Americans lived in,thereforetheidentificationwiththelocalcommunityhadbuiltastrongintersubjectivegridofrelationsnotjustonthescreenbutaswellinreallife.Theblackgangsterwasneverreallybadorevil.Whenheusedvio‐


lenceitwasneverdirectedtowardshisownpeople.Hewassimplyusingtheverysamemethodslikethewhiteoppressorsinthepast,symbolizedby the people in charge of institutions responsible for pushing Afro‐Americans beyond the morally accepted framework and into ghettos.Drug dealers portrayed in SuperFlyweremen of success, admired bysomefortheirmoneyandhatedbymanyforthesamereason.Theydes‐peratelyreachedfortheAmericanDreamlikemanyothersbeforethem,butwithinthesocialcontextandresourcesblacksweregivenbywhitemajority.Eventoday,apopularrationalizationofcriminalactscommit‐ted by black Americans is being led by the argument, that drugs con‐sumptionandtraffickingorcrimesrelatedtouseoffirearmsareacon‐sequence and a tool for ruling Afro‐Americans bywhite eliteswho donotwantthemtobecomeinfluentialintraditionallywhitedomains.

In the“Blaxploitation”moviesevenblackpolicedetectivesandpri‐vateeyeshadaviolentmethodoffulfillingtheirduties.Whenitcomestoguns, fistsandmartialart techniques,Shaft (playedbyRichardRound‐tree)orFoxyBrown(playedbyPamGrier)knewhowtousethemwellbeyond the expectations of their counterparts. A good example of anAfro‐Americancharacterof thatkindwas JimKelly,whoplayedan im‐portant ally in fighting evil along the side of Bruce Lee in the famouskung‐fumovieEntertheDragon(1973).Roundtree,GrierandKellyhadbecome recognizable through their appearance as protagonists withunusual physical skills. These super hero characteristics were almostcomicwiseandeventransferredontocomicbookheroestwentyyearslater,whentheblackSpiderManandBlackFalconappearedonthepag‐esofMarvelbooks.Maincharactersofthesefilmswereusuallydrippingwithmasculinity, often in a very grotesqueway. The sexual attractionwas shown as a instrumentalized relation between men and women.Emotionalengagementwasanunnecessaryobstacle inachievingone’sgoalandthehustlerbecameapopularfigureinthe“Blaxploitation”gen‐re.Unrealappearanceofblackprotagonistsinthemovieswasirrelevant.What was important, was the fact that at last black Americans couldexpresstheirownidentityandpride.

As the genre got its hero, it also had to present to the viewer thecausetheheroisfightingfor.Certainlythesocialandpoliticalpostulatesincludes in the “Blaxploitation”cinemaweremostlyclear for theblackaudience.Americanhistoryhadtoberewrittenwith thesameurgencyasthepresentrealityhadtochange,givingAfro‐Americansthechancetolivebeyondtheirsocial,political,economic,andculturalmarginalization.


Blacknessbecameaspecifickindofidentitysharedatthesametimebytheaudienceand the characterson the screen.Nomatter if theywerecontemporary figures, or purely fictional like in Blackula (1972) orBlackenstein (1973). The identification of Afro‐Americans with the“Blaxploitation”heroeswasinthe1970’sinsomeextentawayofdeal‐ingwithreality.Therejectionof thesocialrealmwasat thesametimecontributing to the acceptance of a new political dimension of pop‐cultureandcinema.Althoughthesimplereversionofrolesinthegivingandreceivingofoppression,usingracialprejudiceandstereotypeswascriticized also by someAfro‐American organizations (like theNationalAssociation for the Advancement of Colored People and the NationalUrban League) the influence of the “Blaxploitation” genre cannot beoverlooked when we reconsider the processes of transitions of Afro‐American identities in thesecondhalfof the20thcentury. Itsestheticsandformmaybeverywell traced inmanycontemporaryculturalphe‐nomena in America of today, sometimes hidden behind the curtain ofpop‐culturaleclecticstyleofpostmoderncinema.

Gender, sex and identity in the Blaxploiation cinema

At this point we may also ask ourselves how the “Blaxploitation”genreshapedthethoseidentitiesinthecontextofgender.It isobviousthatsexrolesplayedasignificantpartinemergingoftheblacknessdis‐courseinthecontextofvisuality,especiallyinthecinematicsense.Ifwelookattheissueofgenderrepresentationandblacknessinthemoviesofthe 1970’s a clear archetype comes to our eyes—blackness is mostlymale.Male characters arebeingpresentedasyoung,bold, andholdinga certain amount of power over the women and whites. Females aresubordinatedtothatpowerinseveralways.Inthefirstplaceweseeanexaggerated sexual attraction, which is loosely being associated withpoliticalpower.Themalecharacter,nomattergoodorevil, isstandingagainst thesocio‐politicalstatusquosetby thewhitesociety.Thehus‐tlerandthecopdonotdiffermuchinthismanner.Womenseemtolovetheirrebelliousentourageandoftenfollowtheirpathbytakingtheirfateonbodiesintheirownhands.EventhepersonaofFoxyBrownusessim‐ilarembodiedpowertogetwhatshewants.Sexualityisthereforebeinginstrumentalizedasahighlyefficientmeantoachievepoliticalgoals,i.e.


emancipation of Afro‐Americans. As we follow this interpretation wealso observe a certain dynamics of gender representation in the de‐scribedcinematicgenre.

The first “Blaxploitaition” movies portrayed men and women ina veryexaggeratedandgrotesqueway.However,wehave to take intoaccount the fact that sowas thewhole blaxploitation universe at thattime.Comic‐likepersonaswerethereforealogicaltransformationofthesurrounding reality put on the screen for the (not just black)masses.Genderwasinthatcontextalsotransformedintoahyper‐realsexuality,anübermasculinity/feminityifwemaysayso.Inthislightthepolariza‐tion of gender in the blaxploitation movies seemed to have a certaingoal—toraisespecificself‐awarenessofthemembersoftheblackcom‐munities in theUnited States. Themanipulation of gender representa‐tions in pop‐culture became an act of self‐identification. Blackness be‐came associated with masculinity, vitality, sexuality and strength.Combininggender, race, politics and social orderhad therefore adeepimpacton themovies themselvesan in consequenceon theaudience’sperceptionofwhatwasgoingonthescreenandbeyondit.Blackgenderhadtobearticulatedinacertainfashioninordertohighlightthecriticalproblemsofsubordinatedgroupslivinginadominantwhitesociety.

As StuartHall states inhis article “Cultural Identity andDiaspora”,cinematicexperiencecontributesvastlytotheemergingofblackidentity(Hall, 1990). Hall puts his remarks in the context of post‐colonial dis‐course on blackness, but he also summarizes the process of identitybuilding itself through pop‐culture. The British scholar assumes thatidentity isbeingconstructed in twomajorways.The firstone, isbeingdrawn from the idea of “one‐ness”, as Hall puts it. This classic post‐colonial optics emphasizes thenotion of anuniversal culture,which isbeingsharedbyeveryoneandhithertocreatesacommon identitypat‐tern.Thismightbecertainlyascribedtotheideaofblacknessinallofitscomplexity. Hall states in this matter that: “It is this identity whichaCaribbeanorblackdiasporamustdiscover,excavate,bringtolightandexpressthroughcinematicrepresentation”(Hall,1990,p.223).

Ontheotherhand,identityisalsobeingtakenintoaccountasanen‐tityofamorecomplexnature.Halldescribesthatthisapproachtowardsidentity “(...) recognizes that, aswell as themany points of similarity,there are also critical points of deep and significant differencewhichconstitute ‘what we really are’; or rather—since history has inter‐vened—‘whatwehavebecome’.” (Hall,1990,p.225). Identity is there‐


foreanongoingproject,adynamicrealitybeingnegotiatedthroughdif‐ferentmeans, for example popular culture. The cinema of “Blaxploita‐tion” reflects verywell this secondapproachwhenwe speakof repre‐sentationsofblackness.Asacinematicgenre,itputsitselfintoaspecificsocio‐politicalcontextandisbeingdefinedbythetransgressionsofthatcontextinahistoricalsense.Culturalidentitieshavetheirownpast,pre‐sentandcertainlysomeof thema future. In thecaseofAfro‐Americanidentitiesrepresentedinthe“Blaxploitation”moviesitismorethanob‐viousofwhatpastandpresentwearespeaking.

The picture of America in the 1970’s portrayed in the “Blaxploita‐tion” movies contributed extensively to the conceptualization of Afro‐American identity in termsofesthetics, social roles,dynamicsof socialchange, gender, and the political discourse. The question of how thisphenomenon isalive todayremainsasapartofa largerproblem—theshaping of cultural identities through pop‐cultural means. Traces ofmovies, fashion, music or comics related to the “Blaxploitation” genremightbestillfoundinthepop‐culturalsphere,despitetheobvioustran‐sitionsthatoccurredintheAmericansocietyforthelastthreedecades.However, the issue ofAfro‐American identities is todaybeing still dis‐cussed on several levels—starting from strictly academic debates andendingwithawidesocialdiscussionintheUnitedStates.Thismightleadustothequestion,howtheproblemofemancipation,inequalityorrac‐ismisbeingresolvedonthelevelofsocialstructureandsocialrelations.Idonotintendtoprovideasatisfyinganswertoit,butIdohopethattheargumentsdeliveredinthistextcastsomelightontheentanglementofpopularcultureandblack identity through the lensof cinema.The im‐pactof“Blaxploitation”moviesontheperceptionofblacknessandgen‐der is in contemporaryAmerican society clearly visible.Definitely thisfactraises furtherquestions thatshouldbeconsideredwhenwespeaknotjustofidentityofAfro‐Americans,butonculturalidentityperse.

REFERENCES

DUNN, S. (2008) “BaadBitches” and Sassy Supermamas.BlackPowerAction Films.Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress.

GUERRERO,E.(1993)FramingBlackness.TheAfricanAmericanImageinFilm.Phila‐delphia:TempleUniversityPress.

HALL,S.(1990)CulturalIdentityandDiaspora.In:Rutherford,J.(ed.)Identity,Com‐munity,CulturalDifference.London:Lawrence&Wishart.pp.222–237.


HANF,M.(2005)TheCultureofBlaxploitation.GrinVerlag.HOOKS, B. (2009) Reel to Real: Race, Class and Sex at the Movies. New York:

Routledge.NOVOTNY, L. (2008)Blaxploitation Films of the 1970’s. Blackness and Genre. New

York:Routledge.SIEVING,CH.(2011)SoulSearching.Black‐themedCinemaFromtheMarchonWash‐

ingtontotheRiseofBlaxploitation.Middletown:WesleyanUniversityPress.SIMS, Y. D. (2006)Women of Blaxploitation: How the Black Action Film Heroine

ChangedAmericanPopularCulture.Jefferson:McFarlandPublishing.STOCKING,G.JR.(1982)Race,CultureandEvolution.EssaysintheHistoryofAnthro‐

pology.ChicagoandLondon:TheUniversityofChicagoPress.WALKER,D.,RAUSCH,A.J.,WATSON,CH.(2009)ReflectionsonBlaxploitation.Actors

andDirectorsSpeak.Plymouth:ScarecrowPress.WILLIAMS,V.J.JR.(1996)RethinkingRace.FranzBoasandHisContemporaries.Lex‐

ington:TheUniversityPressofKentucky.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

LucieJarkovskáMasaryk University (Czech Republic)

Children’s literature and the politics of gender*

ABSTRACT.Thearticlediscusseschildren’sliteratureasamatterthatcanbecomehighlypoliti‐cized. While often viewed as apolitical, stories for children have always been subjected tohegemonic ideologiesandmediateddominantnorms.Theanalysis focusesongenderdimen‐sionof this normativity and shows that the attempts to create gender subversive stories forchildrenhavetofacenotonlytheconservativebacklashbuttheyalsohavetodealwithwiderculturalcontextandcontemporarymeaningsofchildhood.Thelastsectionofthearticleshowsthat nomatter how gender balanced or stereotypical a story is, the interpretation lieswithchildrenthemselves.Thus,researchersanalyzingmessagesinchildren’sstoriesalwayshavetotakeintoaccountyoungreadersandtheirdiversewaysofunderstanding.

KEYWORDS:children’sliterature,gender,gendersubversion,innocence,sexuality

Asanyotherformofart,children’sliteratureisaproductofitstime;it reflects contemporary thought andgeneral ideals, aswell as specificidealsofscientificdisciplinessuchaspsychologyorpedagogy.Theplu‐ralityoflifestylesbringsthepluralityinthesubjectsofchildren’slitera‐ture.Andthus,thefieldofchildren’sliteratureismarkedbypoliticalandideologicalconflictsthatstirthesociety.Parentswhoreadandtellsto‐ries to their children want to communicate to them a worldview towhichtheycancommit.Forsomeparents,itisenoughifthestoriescor‐respond to the basic moral principles, but others can be sensitive toseemingdetailsthatdonotcorrespondtotheidealstheywanttoliveto.This internal conflict with mainstream stories for children is experi‐encede.g.byvegetarians,whomindhowmatterofcourseitisforstorycharacters toeatmeat;byenvironmentalists,whoneednotagreewiththe exploitation of nature or adoration of the world of machines andmeansoftransportthatgetanthropomorphizedandequaledtohumans________________

*This work was supported by Czech Science Foundation under Grant EducationalStrategiesofMigrantsandEthnicMinorityYouth[grantnumberP404‐12‐1487].

74 LUCIE JARKOVSKÁ

(rememberthefilmsCarsorPlances);orbysomereligiousgroups(c.f.theChristian critiqueofHarryPotter for occult andSatanist features).Mainstreamchildren’sliteratureiscriticizedforreproducinghegemonicstructures,raisingchildrenintomodernist‐capitalistsubjectsfocusedonperformance and rewarded by consumption. Part of this critique con‐cernsalso thereproductionof social inequalities related to thecatego‐riesofgenderandethnicity.Thisarticleaimstodiscusstherelationsofchildren’sliteraturetogenderandpolitics.

Gender and children’s stories

Childhoodgetsoftenconnectedtotheworldoffantasyandfairyta‐les.Fairy talesarestorieswithmagicalmotives thatshowan idealizedworld inwhich good triumphs over evil and justice alwayswins. Fre‐quently,socialinequalitiesareovercome.Thebordersofclassaretrans‐gressed(avillagermarriesaprincess),thereisaremarkablesocialmo‐bility(apoorgirlbecomesqueen)andwealthinequalitiesarebalanced(apoorpersoncanfindatreasure,leavesturnintogold),orsometimeswealth turns against thewealthy (they end up imprisoned in treasurecaves,orlackbasicfood,likesalt,etc.).Otherinequalities,however,re‐mainunchanged,andgenderinequalitiesareamongthese.

Since 1970s, gender analyses of children’s literature have beenpointingthattheliteratureforchildrenreflectsgenderstructureofsoci‐etyandhelpstoreproduceit(e.g.Dixon,1977;Gooden&Gooden,2001;Jackson& Gee, 2005; PaceNilsen, 1971;Weitzman et al., 1972; Zipes,1986).Inadditiontothefactthatmaleandfemalecharactersshowste‐reotypical gender features, there is a significantly lowernumber of fe‐male characters and almost always their stories involve heterosexualplots,whilestoriesofmalecharacterscanfunctionwithoutanyrelationstotheoppositesex.Moreover,theauthorteamMcCabe,Fairchild,Grau‐erholz,PescosolidoaTope,whoanalyzedalmost6000titlesofAmericanproductionsincethebeginningof20thcentury,haveillustratedthattheshift towards gender equality has been uneven, non‐linear and closelytiedtotheleveloffeministactivismoranti‐feministbacklash(2011).

AsJudithButlershows,genderandthewaysinwhichwearerecog‐nizedasmenorwomen,stemfromthe(hetero)sexualframeworkofourculture(2003).Heterosexualrelationsrepresentcertainfundamentalgridthat forms the structure of society. This is clearly obvious in children’staleswhereaheterosexualrelationshipbetweentheheroandtheheroine

Children’s literature and the politics of gender 75

is thedrivemotorof thestory.Thesestoriesarenotonlyheteronorma‐tive;theyalsopresentverynarrowgendernorms.Thatistosay,thehet‐erosexualcouplesthatinhabitfairytalesusuallydemonstrateindispensa‐blenormativetraits:themaleheroisvaliant,inventive,andstrong,whilethefemaleheroinehastobebeautifulinthefirstplace,anditisalsocon‐sidered appropriatewhen she is hard‐working, kind, and humble—andwhensheisnot,thensheshouldreformherselfandbecamelikethat.Themale character is an active human subject, while the female characteroftenfindsherselfintheroleofanobjectthatforexampleakingcando‐natetoaprinceforkillingadragon.Children’stalesthuscontributetothefactthatchildrenwhodonotcorrespondtogendernorms—e.g.thosewhoareorwillbeattractedtosame‐sexpersons—willseetheculturetheyarebornintoasstrange,andtheycanfelllonelyandunwelcome.Children,whoconformtoheterosexualnorms,onlyconfirmthatothernessisstrange,dangerous and despicable. It is difficult to come up with educationalprogramspromotingtoleranceanddiversity,whentheenvironmentchil‐drenmeetwithbothatschoolandoutsideofit,actsasaculturalmono‐lithwithauniformimageoftherightlife,notopentoothervariants.

Even if children’s tales suffer from the under‐representation ofwomen,stereotypesaboutwomenaswellasmen,andheteronormativi‐ty,thereisaproductionthatstrivestoun‐followtheseliterarypatterns.From19thcentury,wecanseeaspecificcategoryofbookswithastrongheroinedefyingthegendernorms,suchasAnneofGreenGablesbyLucyMaudMontgomery,orPippiLongstockingbyAstridLindgren.Hopesanddesiresofmanyyounggirlshavebeensetontheseheroinesandsimilarcharacters,asthesegirlshavenotbeencontentwiththe idealofa lan‐guidwaitingprincess.

Contemporary children’s literature ofers also other types of hero‐ines and heroes transgressing gender norms. It is populated by boyswhowantdolls(Wiliam´sDollbyCharlotteZolotow,1976)orwhowantto dance (Oliver Button Is a Sissy by Tomie de Paola, 1979), bytransgenderchildren(10000DressesbyMarcuseEvert,2008),orsame‐sex couples (King and King by Linda de Haan, 2001). The authors ofthese books attempt at the subversion of dominant gender structuresand/ortrytoreflecttheirownexperienceortheexperienceofchildrenwhomtheyknowe.g. fromstoriesofhomoparentalfamilies(JuraaLa‐mabyMarkétaPilátová,2012;AndTangoMakesThreebyPeterParnellandJustinRichardson,2005).Theliteraturethatiscreatedintentionallystrivestosubvertthegenderorders;however,thisliteratureisnotonlya contribution to largerofferbydemand,but—aswewill see later—itbecomestheobjectofpoliticaldisputes.

76 LUCIE JARKOVSKÁ

Children stories as a political matter

Children’sliteratureisnotanapoliticalgenrestandingoutsideofthewider societal debate—which can be proved by disputes running formorethanahundredyears.Atthebeginningof20thcentury,aSwedishteacherwaspunishedbyaschoolboardinSkanörforreadingloudfromthebookTheWonderfulAdventuresofNils (NilsHolgerssonsunderbararesagenomSverige/NilsHolgersson’swonderfuljourneyacrossSweden).TheauthorofthisbookwasthelaterNobelprizewinnerSelmaLagerlöf,whowrote this book on demand from the Swedish National TeachersAssociation. After they had ordered a geographic reader for publicschoolsin1902,Lagerlöfcreatedareadabletextthatchildrenliked.Notsomuchthechurchauthoritiesthatheldpoweralsointheschoolinsti‐tutionandthatdisapprovedofsomepartsofthebook,suchasthechap‐terdealingwith“howithappenedthatourLordandSaintPetercreatedSmåland“ (Strömstedt, 2006). Some fifty years later, a stormy debatewas started with the publication of another Swedish author’s book—PippiLongstocking by Astrid Lindgren. Her book became criticized foroffering a bad example that childrenwould follow. Pippi as a literaryheroine isuntidy,cheeky,andhasnorespect forsocialorder thatpar‐ents,educatorsandteachershavesuchahardtimetoimprintintochil‐dren.Lingren,however,isanauthorwhohasbeencriticizedfrommanydifferent camps. Besides the conservatives, she had struggled later, in1970sand1980s,withthecritiquebytheneo‐Marxists(Strömstedt,2006).

Similar controversies are aroused by books that do not copy thelong‐termgendercodes.Andsomecasesshowthatthesedonothavetobe programmatically feminist or activist literature. In Slovakia, a text‐bookcalledHups’Spelling‐book(2013)waspublished,inwhichthemaincharacterwas a gender‐less personHups.Hupswasneither awomen,norman,andthiswasseenbytheconservativeCatholiccirclesasadan‐gerous implantofgender ideology threatening thesocialorder.Partofthecritiqueinvolvedtheaversiontonastoryofalittleboywhoisgrow‐ing up fatherless, and later hismothermarries their neighbor and hegetsanewfather.TheCatholicChurchperceivedthisstoryasundermin‐ing the traditional family, and based ont heir critique, theminister ofeducationdecidedthatthetextmustberemovedfromthespelling‐book.Hupscan(forthetimebeing)stay.

Another tempestuous debate was inspired by the TV series Tele‐tubbiesintendedfortheyoungestchildren,inwhichwefindthecharacter


TinkyWinky. In 1999, US pastor Jerry Falwell criticized this character,becausehecouldseeTinkyWinkyasagayrolemodel—thecharacterisviolet (a color representinggaypride),hasa triangle antenna (i.e. pridesymbol) and moreover, carries a red bag that looks rather likea ladiesbag.AccordingtoFalwell, “therolemodellingthegay lifestyle isdamaging to the moral lives of children.“ A similar debate sparkled in2007 in Poland,where theOmbudsman for ChildrenEwa Sowińska de‐mandedthatthecharacterisexaminedbypsychologistsoftheirofficeinan apprehension that TinkyWinky might endanger children’s develop‐ment by seeming promoting homosexuality. Already during the US de‐batesoverTinkyWinky,KimViselmanfromItsy‐BitsyEntertainmentthatwasinchargeoftheseriesdistributionintheUSA,saidthatTinkyWinkywasneithergay,norstraight.Sexualitywasnotsupposedtoberepresent‐ed,andstillitwas,codedbyapparentlynon‐sexualsignifierslikeabagorvioletcolor.Itmightnothavebeenintendedbytheauthors,yettheview‐ers (mainly thosewhowerevigilantof the intrudersagainst thegendersystem)founditinbetweenthelines.

TinkyWinky’scaserevealstheanatomyofrelationbetweengenderandsexualityinButler’smeaningofthewords.AccordingtoButler,gen‐der system is legitimized by heterosexualmatrix, and only those indi‐vidualscanbesociallyacceptable,whosesex‐gender‐desiretriadiscon‐stantandstable(Butler1990).IncaseTinkyWinkyisaboy,whowalksaroundequippednotwithagun,butwithamagichand‐bag,thistriadisdisrupted and the defenders of gender order find it easier to put thissign in harmony with desire. It is much more esier than admit thata heterosexual man walks around with a hand‐bag. This would havebeenamoredangerousthreattothegenderorder.

Homosexualityinchildren’stalesisoftenrejectedevenbyrelativelytol‐erantpublic,andthis isbecauseitseemstovisualizesexualitymorethanheterosexualitydoes.ItcanbeassumedthatTinkyWinkywasregardedasamoresexualizedcharacterthanaprincekissingaprincess.Fortheverysamereasons,storiesofhomoparentalfamiliescanannoysomepeople.

The first title in which a homoparental family appears was JennyLiveswithEricandMartin(1981inDanish,1983inEnglish)byaDanishauthorSusanneBösche.Thebookcomposedofblack‐and‐whitephoto‐graphspicturesthelifeofafive‐yearoldJenny,wholiveswithherdadand his boyfriend. Her mother lives not far away and often comes tovisit.Thebookcapturestheeverydaylifeofthefamily.Alsohomophobiais thematized, when a woman passing by expresses her contempt for

78 LUCIE JARKOVSKÁ

Jenny’sfamily.WhenthisbookwaspublishedinGreatBritainin1983,itbecameoneofthepretextsofthedisputedSection28oftheLocalGov‐ernmentAct1988, i.e. theregulationthatprohibitedpromotion—merementioning—of homosexuality in education at schools or documentsissued by local administration. This regulation was in force between1988and2003,anditresultedinthefactthatthebookaboutlittleJennycould not be displayed in any school library, and during educationalprocess,homosexualitycouldnotbementioned.

A beautiful story about homoparental family is found in the bookAndTangoMakesThree(2005)byPeterParnellandJustinRichardson.ItportraysanactualeventthathappenedinNewYork’sCentralParkZOO,wheretwomaleChinstrappenguinsformedacouple.Invaintheytriedtohatchachickonanegg‐likerock,untiloneofthezookeepersgavethemanegg discarded by another couple and Roy and Silo managed to hatchapenguingirlnamedTango,whogotadmiredbythewholeofNewYork.This book, together with other children’s books depicting homosexualcharactersorfamilies(Daddy’sRoommate,King&King,HeatherhasTwoMommies)madeittothelistofthemostchallengedbooksoftheAmeri‐can Library Association, which contains books that attractedmost pro‐testsandattemptsatcensorshiporcompleteban.

Homosexualityinthechildren’sstoriesismoreconsideredtobesex‐ualitythanheterosexuality.Heterosexualityisakindofblueprintthatwedo not even notice in children’s tales; so that whenmother and fatherappear in such a story, nobody thinks about them having a sexual life.When twomothers or two fathers appear, sexuality seems to bemorepresent.Thatiswhythechildren’sstoriesthatinvolveahomosexualcou‐pleor familyseemtocauseembarrassmentat least,oraversioneven inrelativelyopenandtolerantpeople.InthecontemporaryEuro‐Americanculture,childhoodisconstructedasinnocentandhelpless,callingforourprotection.Welovechildren,becausewearecapturedbytheirvulnerabil‐ity, fragility, innocence, sincerity and totally unspoiled nature. Childrenwhoarenotlikethisarenotconsideredchildishatall.Welovetheideali‐zationofchildhoodthatistheembodimentofparadiseonEarth.

Childhood as a paradise of innocence

In our culture that is built on the Jewish‐Christian grounds, theconcept of paradise excludes sexuality.WhenAdamandEve tasted thefruitofthetreeofknowledge,theybecameconsciousoftheirnudityand


experiencedshame—andlostparadiseforever.InthisBiblicalnarration,wecanseetherootsofourcurrentdebatesovertheimproprietyoftheconnectionofchildrenandsexuality.That istosay,childhoodservesastheprojectionofJewish‐Christianparadise,inwhichthereisnoplacefortheconsciousnessofone’ssexuality.

Sexualityisrelatedtosinandpossibledefilement,andthatiswhyithasnoplaceintheparadise.Itisconceivedasaveryproblematicfield,inwhichonecaneasilysliptothedarknessofperdition.Inthepast,itusedto be the Church that would connect sexuality with sin. As Foucaultshows, nowadays it is mainly science—medicine, psychology, andothers—thatsettheboundariesoftherightexperienceofsexualityandthe transgressionof theseboundaries isdefinedasdeviancecalling forredress. Sexuality in our cultural context represents something that isalwayspotentiallyunclearanddangerous,which is inanuttercontrastwith the representation of childhood. The connection of childhoodand sexuality is taboo, and it seems that the sexual revolution thatquestionedmanytabooshasreinforcedtheoneconcerningsexualityandchildhood.Agayorlesbiancharacterinachildren’sstoryisproblematicnotonlyforconservativedefendersofthe“traditional“genderorder,butalso for all who find it unpleasant to open the topic of sexuality withchildren.

Thereisapointintheconnectionofsexualityandknowledgeinthemyth about Adam and Eve’s expulsion from Eden. Part of theconstruction of childhood as naturally asexual involves the fact thatachilddoesnotpracticesex,doesnotexperienceeroticdesire,andhasno consciousness of sex. And, as Foucault says, this is the reasonwhychildrenshouldbedeniedsex,theyshouldbeforbiddentotalkaboutit,and they should close their eyes and cover their ears, whenever theymightgiveanappearanceofknowingaboutit(Foucault,1980).

In accordance with Foucault’s concept that knowledge is power,children’s ignorance in some areas constitutes a hierarchical order inwhichadultpeople(parentsandteachersmainly)arethemorepowerfulonce, and they decide when the children get certain knowledge, andwhentheyareprohibitedorallowedtoengage insexualactivities.Theprotectionofchildrenfrominformationaboutsexualityatthesametimemeans theircontrol.Childrenarekept in ignorance,and this ignorancelegitimizes the refusal to grant them access to power and their sub‐ordinancetoauthority(Jackson,1982).Thematizingsexualityinchildren’sstoriesisnotjustaquestionoftheconservativelobby,whetherchurch‐

80 LUCIE JARKOVSKÁ

related or political, but it is closely related to the effort at preservingothersocialcategoriesandhierarchies.Ifweadmitthesexualsubjectivityof childhood and its right to information, it can lose its paradise‐likeinnocenceandpurity,andceasetobechildhoodforus.

Defying the structure

Ononehand,wecanseethatthesubversionofthegenderorderandheteronormativityconflictswiththegeneralnormsandhierarchies.Ontheotherhand,thebooksthatattempttotransgresstheboundariesandnormsset,areoftenconformingtogenderpatternsortothemoregen‐eralstructuresofrepression.Anexcellentillustrationofthisistheana‐lysisof JaneSunderlandandMarkMcGlashanfocusedonchildren’s lit‐eratureabouthomoparental families (2012).Theyanalyzed25picturebooksfeaturingtwo‐mumandtwo‐dadfamilies,andfocusedon‘explic‐itness’ of these couples about their sexuality, and theyexploreddiffer‐ences in the representation of the gaymums and the gay dads. Theiranalysishasshownthatmumsanddadsweredisplayeddifferently.Forexample the dadsweremore frequently called by they first name anddisplayed physical contact with their partners, while the mums weremoreidentifiedby´relationalidentification´(Mum,Mama,Mommy)anddisplayedlessphysicalcontact.Womenandmenintheanalyzedbooksto some extent followed gendered stereotypes.Mumsweremore con‐structed thandadsas co‐parents, anddadsweremore frequently thanthemumsconstructedaspartners.Noteventheliteratureabouthomo‐parentalcouplescoulddefythedeeplyrootedgenderorder.

Asignificantsymbolicplaceinstoriesaboutgender‐unconventionalchildren belongs to the topic of bullying. Especially the stories aboutsensitive boyswhomay engage in girlish activities tend to repeat thesamescheme—themaincharacter isdifferent,otherthanthemajority,hisenvironmentdespiseshim—oratleastthemalepartofhiscommuni‐ty,heisbeingdrivenoutofplaces,mocked,andpeopleareangryathim;later on, he achieves something good or useful, and thus he gains therighttoexistoreventehrespectandfriendshipofothers.Suchamerit‐based recognition can be found in the books Oliver Button is a Sissy,10 000Dresses, TheBoywith PinkHair, etc. This scheme is, however,quitetricky.Itdoesnotpresentdiversityassomethingwhichweallarepartofandwhichisvaluableinitself,butassomethingthatputsadif‐


ferent individual against a homogeneousmajority—and the only things/hecandotomakeitrightistobeusefulenough.Whenwereadchil‐drenstorieslikethis,weremindthemofthemarginalityoftheotherandthedominanceofmainstream.Onecanremedyone’shandicapbybeingaproductive individual,whomaybea littlebitqueer,butwhohasnotresigned on the more general modernist‐capitalist meaningfulnessdwellinginmerit.

Bronwyn Davies reminds that the feminist analysis of stories re‐quiresnotjusttheidentificationofstereotypes,butbesidesfocusingonthecontent,wealsoneedtofocusonmetaphors,formsofrelationshipsand models of power and desire that are created in the text (Davies,2003, p. 47). The poststructuralist perspective laid the emphasis fromthetextonthereader.Afundamentalquestionforthefeministreadingofchildren’stextsishowthechildrelatestothetext,hows/heinvestsherself/himself in it, how s/he interprets and uses it. A text does notworkinalinear,unequivocalway;itsinterpretationalwaysisrelatedtothewayof reading, theexperiencesof readers, and to their relating tothetextandcontextinwhichtheyread.It isnotatallcertainthatgen‐der‐stereotypical stories will determine children to traditional genderstructuring of their lives, while feminist stories will emancipate themfromthesetraditionalstructures. It isnot justamatterofwhat ishap‐pening in a storyandwho the characters are,butmainlyofwhat chil‐drentakefromthem.Itoftencanbesignificantdetailsthattheadultdonotevennotice.

SimilarlytoDavies,IreadthestoryofPaperBagPrincessbyRobertMunsch(1980)withchildrenofoneCzechschool.Itnarratesthestoryofaprincesswhohadbeenkidnappedbyadragonandsavedbyaprincess(Jarkovská,2013).Thefairytale,however,doesnotendwithamarriage,sincethesavedprincedoesnotlikethattheprincessisdirtyandclothedinapaperbag.Forsomechildren(mainlythosewhowereconsideredtobe“goodgirls“),itwasastoryaboutabraveprincessandastupidprincewhodidnotwanttheprincess.Forsome(mainlyboys),itwasastoryofa stupid prince,who got kidnapped by a dragon. For others (boys), itwas a story of a dragonwho demolished a kingdom (for one boy, thedragonwas amotherwho taught little dragonshow to set a castle onfire),forotherchildrenitwasastoryofaburntcastle,andonegirl,theclass tomboy, tried to preventme from reading the story. She did notwanttoacceptthatthedragonkidnappedtheprince,andshestartedtoprotestatthismomentandaskedmetoadmitthattheprincessshould

82 LUCIE JARKOVSKÁ

bekidnapped.When I refused, she foundadifferent solution—shede‐clared that it was a homosexual dragon. Similarly to Tinky Winky,aqueercharacterbecamemoreacceptableasgayasanatypicalhetero‐sexualmale.

REFERENCES

BÖSCHE,S.(1983)JennyliveswithEricandMartin.GayMen’sPress.BUTLER,J.(1990)GenderTrouble.NewYork:Routledge.DAVIES,B. (2003)FrogsandSnailsandFeministTales:PreschoolChildrenandGen‐

der.Cresskill,N.J.:HamptonPress.DEHAAN,L.(2000)Koning&Koning.GottmerUitgeversGroep.DEPAOLA,T.(1979)OliverButtonisasissy.Brace&Company.DIXON, B. (1977) Catching Them Young: Sex, Race and Class in Children’s Fiction.

London:PlutoPress.EVERT,M.(2008)10000Dresses.SevenStoriesPress.FOUCAULT,M.(1980)Thehistoryofsexuality.NewYork:Vintage.GOODEN,A.M.&GOODEN,M.A.(2001)Genderrepresentationinnotablechildren’s

picturebooks:1995–1999.SexRoles.45(1–2),pp.89–101.HILTON,P.(2011).TheBoyWithPinkHair.CelebraChildren’sBooks.HIRSCHNEROVÁ,Z.(2013)Hupsovšlabikár.Lipka.1.Časť.Aitec.JACKSON,S.(1982)ChildohoodandSexuality.Oxford:BasilBlackwell.JACKSON,S.&GEE,S.(2005)‘LookJanet’,‘NoyoulookJohn’:constructionsofgender

inearlyschoolreaderillustrationsacross50years.GenderandEducation.17(2).pp.115–128.

JARKOVSKÁ,L.(2013)Genderpředtabulí.Praha:Slon.MUNSCH,R.(1980)PaperBagPrincess.AnnickPress.NEWMAN,L.(1989)HeatherHasTwoMommies.AlysonBooks.PACE NILSEN, A. (1971) Women in children’s literature. College English. 32(8).

pp.918–976.PILÁTOVÁ,M.(2010)JuraaLama.LePress.STRÖMSTEDT,M.(2006)AstridLindgrenová.Životopis.Praha:Albatros.SUNDERLAND, J. & MCGLASHAN M. (2012) The linguistic, visual and multimodal

representation of two‐Mum and two‐Dad families in children’s picturebooks.LanguageandLiterature.21.pp.189–210.

WEITZMAN, L. et al. (1972) Sex‐role socialization in picture books for preschoolchildren.AmericanJournalofSociology.77.pp.1125–150.

WILLHOITE,M.(1991)Daddy’sRoommate.AlysonBooks.ZIPES, J. (ed.) (1986)Don’t Bet on the Prince: Contemporary Fairy Tales inNorth

AmericaandEngland.Aldershot:Gower.ZOLOTOW,CH.(1972)William´sdoll.Harper&John.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

AlicjaOrtyneckaJagiellonian University in Kraków (Poland)

Birth of cyber-supermothers

ABSTRACT. The study aims to reveal and to describe a new type of mother—cyber‐super‐mother,whichcombineshouseholddutieswithprofessionalresponsibilitiesbytakingprofes‐sionalactivityintheInternet.Thestudyanalyzesnewmodelofmaternitycombiningelementsof traditional (motherhood as an instinct, conviction regardingpersonal care of a child, etc.)andmodernmodel(postulateofself‐fulfillment,blurring theboundariesbetweentheprivateandthepublicsphere,genderequality,etc.).

KEYWORDS:Internet,maternity,cyber‐reality

Preface

Inability to fulfill family and professional roles in a satisfactoryrange, causes constant stress in a scheduleandemotional life ofmanymodernwomen,whichwanttocombinemotherhoodwithacareer.De‐spitethefact,that“modernwifeorapartnerisinamuchbetterpositionthanhergrandmotheroragreat‐grandmother”(Sikorska,2009,p.163)however,genderequalityisstill“anidealpursuedanddesiredbymostofwomen” (Titkow,Duch‐Krzystoszek&Budrowska,2004,p.15), andwhose reality is an excessive burden on household and caring chores.UlrichBeckandElisabethBeck‐Gernsheimfindwomenasstillentangledin the dilemma of choosing between self‐fulfillment and altruism andempathy. AnnaGiza‐Poleszczukwrites that “we still have to dealwitha situation inwhichpeoplewantapartnership indomesticduties,butsomehow in fact ‘can not’ realize it; wherewomenwant towork andhavechildren,buttheyhavetobeartheentireriskontheirown”(Giza‐Poleszczuk,2009,p.193).AsShrikhalaWarrierobserves“menarestillregardedasthe‘breadwinners’,whilethemanagementofthehousehold,domestic chores, and thephysical careandpsychologicalwell‐beingofchildrenarefirmlyidentifiedasthewife‐mother’sresponsibility”(War‐rier, 1988, p. 108) According to the research ofMargaret Fine‐Davies,

84 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

Jeanne Fagnani, Dino Giovannini, Lis Hojgaard and Hilary Clarke“measuresofwell‐beingwereallpositivelycorrelatedinallcases,exceptthatforfathers,satisfactionwiththeirworkwasunrelatedtotheirsatis‐factionwith family life, whereas formothers, it was highly correlated(…)” (Fine‐Davies et al., 2004, p. 241). Does the motherhood need tohaveanegative impactonsocialandprofessionalactivitiesofwomen?Manyscientificworkdescribeindetailtheheroicstruggleofwomenoffindingaharmonybetweenfamilyandwork.“Employedmothers, irre‐spectiveoftheirethnicaffiliations,findthemselvescaughtbetweentwopressures:ontheonehandistheperceivedneedformorethanonein‐cometosupportahome,andontheother,thepressinglogisticalprob‐lemsoffulfillingwork‐roleobligationsaswellasdomesticresponsibili‐ties,includingchildcare”(Fine‐Daviesetal.,2004,p.113).

Balancebetweenthesetwospheresisevenmoreelusive,ifwetakeintoaccounttheevolvingintheageofindividualism,theideathatachildis now “economically worthless but emotionally priceless” (Slany &Kluzowa,2004).Ifachildisanautotelicvalueforaparent, inthecom‐parisontowork‐itwillalwaysbeinaprivilegedposition.Thisreasoningalso goes hand in hand with the concept of “intensive motherhood”(Hays, 1998),which implies that themother is not only a person thatcaresaboutthehealthofthechild,butalsoapersonprovidingcompre‐hensive child development, a person responsible for the best possiblestartinindependentlifeofachild.

SusanDouglasandMeredithMichaelsanalyzingmediaportrayalsofmothers, identified a popular construction of the goodmother symbolarising frompostfeminist ideals and they called it “the newmomism”.Thenewmomismconsists of notionsof intensivemothering, inwhichwomen with children are extremely competent stay‐at‐home moms,maincaregivers,alwayssmilingandunderstanding,andexhibitbound‐less, unflagging and total love andmotherhood is themost importantthingawomancando(Powell,2010,p.38).

Thecombinationofintensivemotherhood,intensivework,poorcareinfrastructure and limitations resulting from rigid hours of work andotherinconveniencesofPolishlabormarketmakesmodernmotherhooda real challenge, requiring organizational, financial, physical and emo‐tional effort. As a result,we get high‐quality children andmothers re‐ducedtoaroleofrobotsfocusedon‘theproject:Child’.

Duetosuchabsorbingcontemporarymaternalroleitisnotsurpris‐ing, thatthesewomenalmostcannotdevotethemselvestoanysphere

Birth of cyber‐supermothers 85

ofactivity.According toRenataHryciuk“on theonehandwomen’sas‐signmenttodomesticsphereimposesthemaroleofabufferabsorbingthesocialcostsofsystemicchange(see:Lister2005),ontheotherhand,it disputes the validity of their claimsandas a consequence, obstructswomen’sgrass‐rootsinitiatives”(Hryciuk&Korolczuk,2012,p.23).

Ineffect,thereislackofdataonmothers’socialactivity.Perhapsthequestionshouldberaised,ifsuchexistsatall?Secondly,whenitcomestoeconomicactivity—Polandhasoneofthelowestemploymentrateofwomen having children under 3 years of age. According to the report“Maternity vs.women’s professional job” from2006, three out of fourwomenwereplanningtoreturntoworkaftermaternityleave,butonly23% had actually take an employment. Both the professional activityrate and theemployment rateofwomen in theperiodof familyestab‐lishinganddevelopingremainsbelowthelevelobservedformeninallEU‐27 countries (Bukowski, 2010).According to the Central StatisticalOffice,almost16%ofinactivewomen(1.34million)doesnotworkduetofamilyobligationsanddutiesrelatedtorunninghome.Significant is,thatthelargestagegroupamongthesewomenarewomenofreproduc‐tiveage, i.e.25–34years (527thousand). It ischaracteristic for femaleeconomicactivitythat‘womentend,onthewhole,toenterandre‐enterthe labour force according to the stages in their family formation andtheirownlife‐cycle(Warrier,1988,p.109).Moreover,culturalpressuretowards staying at home with children is also very strong. Basing onAmericanresearchformGallupPoll,mostAmericansstillthinkthat“intheidealfamilysituationoneparentshouldstayhome”(Carr,2005).Ofcourseitismostlythefemalepartofthefamily.

Cultural and structural stigma

ThenatureofthePolishlabormarketmakesthesituationofyoungmothersevenharder. Inparticular, insufficientdevelopmentof flexibleformsandhoursofworkandthereluctanceofemployerstohireyoungmothers.Taxpolicy(includingprogressivetaxation,familybenefits,etc.)alsoaffectdemotivatingtotakingemploymentbymothers.

In Poland great impact on these processes had systemic transfor‐mation,whichchangedtheconditionsofparticipationinthelabormar‐ketandsocialbenefitssystem,andthusincreasedthedifficultyofcom‐biningworkandfamilyresponsibilities.AsTitkowargues,theresultant

86 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

of:post‐romantic conceptof themythof thePolishMother,nationalistvision of social relations, dominating in Poland catholicism, neoliberaldiscourseofefficiencyandindividualresponsibility;wascriticalinrede‐finingthepositionofwomensince1989.Newjobanddevelopmentop‐portunitieshadopenedup,whiletherealchanceofmakingsuchactivityreduced and displaced women form the labor market and the publicsphere(Titkow,2007,p.16).

EleonoraZielinska’sstudyclearly testifies to the fact, that thestateproceduresundertaken in the transitionperiod,although it focusedonequal opportunities forwomen in employment, in fact “resulted inde‐creaseofcompetitivenessofwomeninrelationtomen,andtheirgreatersusceptibilitytotheeliminationfromthelabormarket”(Zielińska,2002,p.56).Amongthespecifiedregulationswere:prohibitionofemploymentof women in severe or harmful work, the prohibition of work on thenightshiftandovertime,protectionoflong‐termemploymentofwomeninpregnancy,maternityandparental leave, theextensionofmaternityleave and the introduction of shorter than men’s retirement age. Theresult of these changes, as proven by Zielińska, is the highest unem‐ploymentrateofwomenintheagegroupunder25yearsofage.

Additional factors pushing out women from the labor market in‐clude: small number of places in nurseries and kindergartens, socialpressureconcerningtheneedforpersonalcareofthechild,thedifficultyofre‐adaptationtotheworkenvironmentandothers.

Adopted in 2011, the so‐called ‘NurseryBill’, facilitating the estab‐lishment of nurseries as well as introducing a number of alternativeformsofcare, includingbabyclubs,dailycaregiverpaidbythemunici‐palityorananny,whosesocialinsuranceiscoveredbythestatebudget,wasintroducedinordertoenablewomencombiningfamilyandprofes‐sional responsibilities. Certainly mothers interested in institutionalformsofcarefortheirchildren,wereinamuchbetterposition.

However,asMariaWiśnickaandŁucjaKrzyżanowskashowintheirresearch (Krzyżanowska &Wiśnicka, 2009, p. 135), mothers perceivecaregivers,kindergartensandnurseriesasanecessaryevil.Notonlythisisanadditionalburdenonthehouseholdbudget, thenumberofplacesinpublickindergartensandnurseries is limited,openinghoursarenotadaptedtoparents’workinghours,theseplacesarehotbedsofdiseases,but also leaving a child in the care of a stranger is a huge stress andenormouspsychologicaldiscomfortforamother.

Opponentsofthebill,amongwhicharerepresentativesofinfluentialexpertorganizationssuchasABCXXIFoundation—AllofPolandReads


toKidsandPolishPediatricSociety,aswellasanationalchildandado‐lescentpsychiatryconsultant,believethatinstitutionalizedformsofcareareharmfultothepsycheofayoungchild.

Convergentpointofviewoftheabovehavewomenwhoagreewithfundamental postulate of mainstream philosophy of raising childrencalledattachmentparenting,accordingtowhichtheavailableandphysi‐cally and emotionally present mother is the key to proper social andemotional development of a child. Personal care of a child is the onlywayforthosewomen,whofeel,thatthefactofbeingamotherisaturn‐ingpointintheirlife,thatrequiresareorganizationoflife’sprioritiesinfavorof family andhome.According toBogusławaBudrowska (2000),andAnnaTitkow(2007),mostwomenperceivestheroleofamotherasthebasisoftheir identity.Isaconflictbetweenfamilyandprofessionalobligationsanecessityforthemajorityofwomen,bothinPolandandinthe world? If we take into account the fact, that “the dominant Euro‐Americanculturenormativemodelofmotherhoodisapatternofinten‐sivemotherhood”(Urbańska,2009,p.6),andthat“thecurrentmodelofadulthoodforwomenistocombinefamilyandprofessionalresponsibili‐ties” (Budrowska, 2000, p. 224) it is surprising, that the state has nothelpedsofarinanywaywomen,whoreallywanttodefusetheconflict.

Recent regulations in this respect, i.e. the law regardingmaternityleaveandadditionalleaveonthetermsofmaternityleaveandparentalleave, effective from 1 September 2013, extended the period of paidchildcare,reaching52weeksofthebirthofonechildandfrom65to71weeks in thecaseofmultiplebirths,dependingon thenumberof chil‐drenbornatonebirth.TheActmeetstherecommendationoftheWorldHealthOrganizationconcerningtheexcludedbreastfeedingforthefirstsixmonthsof lifeofachildandpreferablyasaprimaryorsupplemen‐taryfeeding,tocompletionfirstyearofage.

Certainly many mothers, regardless of feeding method, appreciatethegestureof the legislator in the formofpaidmaternityandparentalleave,whichallowstoanextendedperiodofchildcarewithouthavingtogo towork. However, opponents of the bill accuse the government ofmaking populist decisions, that instead of improving the situation ofwomeninthe labormarket,worsen itdramatically,causingaone‐yearbreakfromprofessionalcareer,ariskofseriousregressionofknowledge,competenciesandskillsandthusevenlesscompetitivenessonthelabormarket.Althoughthislawgiveswomanthepossibilityoflongerperson‐alcareofachild, innowayit isaresponsetooneofthebiggestprob‐

88 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

lems of modern women—harmonious combining family and work re‐sponsibilities.

Dedicationtotheupbringingofachildwhilemaintainingcompletelyoutside the labormarket is not an option acceptable tomanymodernwomen.This ismainlydueto financialreasons:youngfamiliescannotmake the living from only one salary. It is repeatedly emphasized byanumberofstudies, thateconomicneedexperiencedbymanyfamiliesis themost influential factorpropellingmarriedwomenintothework‐force.“Whileadistinctionisoftenmadebetweenworkingoutoffinan‐cial necessity and the need to improve the family’s standard of living,high inflation, thedrop inreal income,andrisingmaleunemployment,as well as a perceived need to spread the family’s risks, have led toagreaterrelianceinthewage‐earningactivitiesofthefemalemembersof the family”(Warrier,1988,p.106).Buteventhosewomen,whoarenot forced tomake thisdecisionsolelyon financialgrounds, feelsocialpressure intheformof“theorderof independenceandself‐sufficiencyofmothersandtheconvictionthatthewillingnesstomakesacrificesforthegoodofthefamilyandsustainingchildrenarepartsofthedesignofgood motherhood” (Titkow, 2003, p. 20). Moreover, many researchshowthatemploymentofamotherhasagreatpositive impactonher‐self, children and w family as a whole. Lois w. Hoffman and Lise M.Youngblade point out those positive effects of employed mothers onchildren’s well‐being: higher academic achievement, higher cognitivescores, greater career success,more nontraditional career choices andgreateroccupational commitment,more independenceof a child in in‐teractionwith their peers, higher score on socioemotional adjustmentmeasures,etc.(Hoffman&Youngblade,1999,p.5).Theyalsolistfurtheradvantagesforwomenthemselves:higherlevelofsatisfactionformlifein general, lower scores onpsychosomatic symptoms,measures of de‐pression,andvariousstressindicators,higherself‐esteem,greatersenseofcontrolovertheirlives,etc.(Hoffman&Youngblade,1999,p.23).

Meanwhile,asemphasizedbyIrenaKotowska“inEuropeitisneed‐ed to simultaneously increase theemploymentofwomenand increasetheir fertility” (Kotowska, 2009, p. 149). How to reconcile these twoobjectives, if theyarebothcompeting for thesamegoods: timeandat‐tentionofawoman?Taking intoaccountPolatnick’spointofviewthat“whenbothjobsandhomedemandmanhours,balancingorjugglingisnot sufficient” (Padavic & Reskin, 2002, p. 154), women themselves,havefoundtheanswertothatquestion.


The Internet revolution

Even in the 90’s youngmothers in Poland had a dilemma: stay athomeanddevotethemselvestothecareofachildandrunningahouse‐hold, or try to combine these maternal and domestic responsibilitieswith work. Important circumstances which were taken into accountwhenmakingthesedecisions,waswhetherthehusbandearnsenoughtoprovideforthewholefamilyorisitalsonecessaryforwifetoearnsomemoney, is there any relativewho can take care of a child, is there anygoodnurseryorkindergartenintheneighborhood,etc.Theproblemofwomen’sprofessionalplanswasnotanimportantfactor,althoughprob‐ably for some highly educated professional women or artists, it mat‐tered.Amajorrolewasplayedbytraditional ideologyemphasizingim‐portantroleofmaternalcare,breastfeeding,awoman’sdutytosacrificeforthegoodofachild.

Thedecisionto‘stayathome’anddedicationtobringingachildandtaking care of house and family meant actual ‘staying’ in domesticspherewithout the opportunity to participate in public life:work (be‐sidesasimplecottage industry), socialactivity,participation inculture(exceptfortheseformswhicharepossibletopracticeathomei.e.read‐ershipandtelevisionreception),orsociallife(exceptforphonecallsormeetings at sandbox). In addition, the woman ceased to be self‐containedunit, but thenbecame apartof awider structure,namely—thefamily.

Reducingtheroleofawomantotheprivatesphere,onlyrelatedtothecareofachildandhomeresultedinanincreaseinsocialinequalities.Financial dependence on a husband, the lack of access to alternativesourcesofself‐esteem,thelackofexternalresourcesofauthoritysubor‐dinated women to men. Therefore “closing the women at home withchildren”placedthematriskofsocialexclusion.

DrawingontheresearchofJoanPeters,whoexamineddozenoffam‐ilies,sacrificialmotherhoodinwhichmotherasamaincaregiverforgetsaboutherneedsconcerningherprofessional life,results inpoorerpar‐entingexperience,weakermarriagesandlessbalancedchildren(Peters,1997),Sheposesaquestion,whichpuzzlesmeaswell:whymotherhoodandworkbelongtosuchinconciliablerealities?

TheresearchconductedbyŁucjaKrzyżanowskaandMariaWiśnickashowsthat‘thefundamentalproblemofmothersofyoungchildrenandwhattheyfindmostdisturbingineverydayfunctioningisasenseofan

90 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

isolationfromthe‘world’,detachmentfromtheadults’affairs’(Krzyża‐nowska&Wiśnicka,2009,p.116).Thisisolationisalsoaconsequenceofinstitutionalbarriers,ofwhichthemostimportantisthesituationinthelabormarket,whichisstillbasedonthetraditionalsystemofworkrely‐ingonthepresenceofworkersintheofficeinrigidhours.AsIrenePa‐davic and Barbara F. Reskin observes “many employers have not re‐thoughttheorganizationofwork,thatexistedinthe1950s,whenmostworkershadwiveswhoattendedtothehomefrontfulltime”(Padavic&Reskin,2002,p.153).

Internetrespondstotheneedofwomen,offeringthemamobileandflexible workplace, tailored to their capabilities and availability. “Thecyber‐worldopenedperspectivesandrelationshipsnotavailableprevi‐ously”(Pertierra,2007,p.196),andbecome“anewpossibilityforbeing‐in‐the‐world” (Pertierra,2007,p.198).Today, “thanks toglobalization,theinformationrevolutionandmoderntechnology,theworkexceededthetraditionalboundariesoftimeandplace”(Kropiwnickietal.,2008,p.35).

Contemporary woman is one of the biggest beneficiaries of thesetechnologicalandculturalchanges.Awomancannownotonlyself‐fulfillas a housewife, but also can combine being a housewife, mother anda businesswoman. Such “bizneskwoki,” as they say about themselves,womenwhohavedecidedtosacrificetobringingupachildwithasimul‐taneous lack of resignation of career aspirations. Women runninge‐businesses, regardlessof the formof it—ablog, aweb site or onlineservice—whilebeinghome,intheprivatesphere,theyalsogoouttothepublicsphere.

Professionale‐activityprovidesnumerousfeaturesnotonlyrelatedtotheprovisionoffamilyincome,andthusalsoanincreaseofthefinan‐cialindependenceofwomen,butalsomeetstheneedforsocialinterac‐tionandsocializingFurthermore, it isasourceofsocialrespect, itena‐blestheutilizationoftheknowledgeandprofessionalskills,enablesthedevelopment of passions and interests (if the blog theme or area ofe‐businesscoincideswiththehobby,whichisoftenthecase)anditisanimportantformofmodernreflexivity(Giddens,2007,p.54).MagdalenaSokołowskainPolandandHelenaZnaniecka‐LopataintheUnitedStateshad formulated the problem of “the unknown environment—a house‐hold”(Znaniecka‐Lopata,1973).Despitethefact,thattheseresearchers,more than a half century ago analyzed the unpaid work of women athomeandforfamily,theirresearchproblemisstillrelevanttodayinthecontextofcyber‐mothers.Itissignificant,thatCentralStatisticalOffice’s


report“WomeninPoland”marginalizessystematicallythephenomenonofwomeninthehousehold.Meanwhile,blogsande‐businessesarebe‐coming increasinglypopularphenomenon,aboutwhichweknowlittle.Simplicityofsettingthemupcausestheirrapidgrowth.AccordingtotheGemius,thereare16thousandofe‐businessesinPoland(2012)andthevalueofthemarket—onlyinfouryears,from2008to2012—morethandoubled—from11tonearly23billionzl(Cichońetal.,2013,p.18).

There is similar situationwithblogs. It isdifficult to calculatehowmanyofthemthereareintheworldtoday.ServiceBlogpulseestimatesthisnumberataround135million.Polishblogosphere isestimatedforabout3millionofblogs. In2005–2010inPolandtheblogospheredou‐bleditsreachamongInternetusersandthenumberofusersincreasedthree times. According to the PBI’s data from 2010 (Garapich, 2011),almost 11 million Poles visited blogs (nearly 60% of Internet users).AccordingtotheCBOS’sdatafrom2013(Feliksiak,2013),thereisaboutamillionbloggersinPoland,whichmeansthatevery20thInternet‐useristheauthorofat leastoneblog.AsAndrzejGarapich,thePresidentofPolish Internet Research claims “the blogosphere has a greater rangethanPolityka,Newsweek,WSieci,DorzeczyandWprostaltogether.MorepeoplerefertothemthantoTVN24,PolsatNewsandTVPInfo,thatistomediabelievedtobereliable.Despitethis, theblogosphereremainsonthesidelinesinterestsofmarketers,advertisersandresearchers”(Baran&Miotk,2013).

Parentalblogisanewtypeofablog,whichconcernsthesubjectofparenthood, raising children and/or actions resulting from the fact ofbeingaparent.Sofar,nobodyexaminedhowmanyofthemthereareintheworld. Some sites provide only aggregated statistics of establishedblogging platforms,without distinction on the subject of a blog.WhileestimatingthisnumberIdecidedtorelyontheresultsofaGoogleBlogsSearchbyenteringasearchterm‘blogparentingowy’.Morethan16,000results1retrievedinlessthanonesecondgivestheapproximatesizeofthephenomenonwithwhichwearedealing.

Takingprofessionalactivityinvirtualspacehasbecomeagatetoan‐otherworld forwomen, through the spread of the Internet on a largescale and low barriers of entry to the Internet business. Thanks to noneedforofficialsettingupabusinessandpossessionofafinancialcon‐tributionintheearlyphasesofastart‐up,theavailabilityoffreetoolsfor________________

1Uptodateon15.04.2014.

92 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

creating websites, free business promotion channels in the network,suchas socialnetworking sites, forums, etc.wearewitnessinga rapidincreaseof foundedwebsites,oftensetupbyamateurswhostarted toperceive the network as a source of earning. Also, women who aremothers havediscovered in this option a chance to stay at homewithachild,whilenotremainingoutsidethelabormarket.Thevirtuallabormarketasopposedtothetraditional,realinadditiontoincreasedmobil‐ity,eliminatestheproblemofwagedisparitiesbetweenmenandwom‐en,creatinganidealworkplaceformodernmothers:mobile,activeandindependent.

Birth of the cyber-supermother

Thankstotherehabilitationofthesocialroleofwomeninchargeofthe house, nowperceived—not as it used to be—“a tormented house‐wife,butbusy,althoughtakingcareofherselfhomemanager”(Sikorska,2009,p.93).Womenworkingprofessionallyathomemaynowproudlyproclaimtotheworld ‘Itakecareofhome’.Accordingtodata fromtheCentral Statistical Office “although after 1990 the number of women,whochosetakingcareofthefamilyinsteadofprofessionalworkgradu‐allydropped” (Cywoniuk,2008), since2004,wecanobserveagradualincreaseofthisratio,whichin2007reached1.5million.

Althoughtheydealwithcleaning,cooking, ironingandotheractivi‐ties similar to ordinary housewives, unlike its predecessors they canreapsociallysanctioned‐oratleastpopularizedinthemediaandpublicawareness—satisfaction of their tasks. New traditionalist abandonedclimbing up the professional ladder for the sake of love,marriage andmotherhood.Magazine‘YourStyle’,citedbySikorska,describesthesitu‐ationof25‐year‐oldarchitectdesign,whichcouldbearepresentationofcyber‐supermother’sapproach:

Małgosialaughsthatanartistbecameahousewife.Modern!Withmake‐up,inatrendyblouse.IdonotwanttobethePolishMother,whosacrificeseve‐rything.Iknowwhat’sbeenplayedatthemovies,what’sgoingoninthear‐chitecture.IreadaboutitwhenMikołajsleepsonmybelly—sheresponds.In two years, the second child is born and then I catch up, complete thestudies.Careercanwait,but thefirstyearsofchild’s lifepass forever.Youcannotmissthem.


Model of intensivemotherhood emerging from the image above ischaracteristic dominant pattern of motherhood in Euro‐American cul‐ture. Intensivemotherhoodimplies, thattheabilitytocareofachild isbiologicallyconditionedandbelongstoawoman,astheonewhoshouldtake careof a child for at least the first three yearsof child’s life.Thisapproach emphasizes the emotionally absorbing, intensive physicallyand costly financial education focusedona child andbasedon theau‐thorityofexperts.Thispatternimplies,thatawomanhastheabilityandwillingnesstogiveupworkalsoasasourceofincome,duetothewell‐earningpartner,whoisabletoprovideforhisfamily.Inthispattern,theroleofamotherrefersonlytothecaringfunctions.

Motherstakingprofessionalactivity inthenetworkononehandfitintothismodel,recognizingtheirdutyandtheneedforpersonalcareofachildandsubmitting itovertheexistingprofessionalwork.However,on theotherhand, thesewomendonotentirelyabandon theirprofes‐sional aspirations, but merely adapt them to the circumstances, andtheirmaternalrolereachesfarbeyondthecaringfunctions.Availabilityalmost theentire timeof thesewomen for thechilddoesnotprecludeneithertheirprofessionalactivitiesfulfillment,norsocialfunctionsasso‐ciated with making and maintaining social relationships, et al. Is thecyber‐motheranew typeof a supermother, skillfully combining fulfill‐mentoffamilyandprofessionalobligations?Ifso,itwouldmean,thatinthecasewearedealingwithanewmodelofmotherhood,enabledtech‐nically thanks to the Internet and socially sanctionedby the cultureofindividualism.Modelofa cyber—supermotherwouldbe thenahybridof the traditional pattern (motherhood as instinct, belief in the needpersonal care of the child, etc.) and themodel of themodern pattern(postulate of self‐fulfillment, blurring the boundaries between the pri‐vateandthepublic,genderequalityinprofessionalduties,etc.).

Theoccurrenceofcyber‐supermotherswouldnotbepossibleifnotthe effects of the moral revolution and the activities of the feministmovementinthe60’sandthe70’s,thathaveinfluencedtheexpansionoffreedomofchoiceofsociallyacceptablesocialroles,which“repertoireismore diverse than it was a few years ago” (Sikorska, 2009, p. 95). Incontrasttothepositionofwomeninmorethanhalfacenturyago“awifeor a partner may now‐with incomparably greater freedom than everbefore—choosebetweenbeinga successfulwomanprofessional ‘homemanager’,achildlesswomanoramotherofseveralchildren”(Sikorska,2009,p.159).AsSikorskawrites“inPolandthisprocessstartedpracti‐

94 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

callysincehetransformationofthesystem,after1989”(Sikorska,2009,p.322).

In addition, according to the research byMartaOlcoń‐Kubicka “to‐daybeingamotherisnolongerthefactor,whichautomaticallyexcludeswomenfromsocialactivity”(Olcoń‐Kubicka,2009,p.40).Thewomanisnolongerforced“tositathomewiththebaby”alldaylongandtoleadalmosttheonlyconversationsabouttheproverbial‘soupandfeces’withneighboringmothersgatheredatthesandbox.Nowadays,powerfulen‐tertainmentindustrywaitsforamother,offeringherarangeofservicesin the form of clubs, cafes, cinemas, theaters, shops, educational andgymnasticsactivitiesandothers.

In theeraof individualismculture takesplacea redefinitionof theroleofwoman’spartner.Modernmaninthefamilyisnolongerahistor‐icalmodel of the “father‐king’ or the ‘father‐God” supremely anddeci‐sivelygoverninginthefamily,whomisduerespectandabsoluteobedi‐ence,butamodelofawareofaroleofafatherman,bothphysicallyandemotionally involved in bringing up a child and supporting mentally(andstilleconomically)hispartner.

Thechildalsochanged itsposition in the family, thanks to i.a.newtheoriesofeducation (e.g.by JanuszKorczak,BenjaminSpockandHu‐bertvonSchoenbeck)accentingitssovereigntyasanentity, individual‐ism, far‐reaching freedom to decide for themselves and imposingasymmetryintheparent‐childrelationshipbasedonpartnership.

Changing rolesandpositionsof familymembers,have changed thefamilyasawholeinthedirectionoftheinstitutiondefinedasaninterac‐tive process, so that the traditional distinction between the privatesphere,thefeminineandthepublicsphere,menlosescrucialmeaninginshapingthegendercontract(Fuszara,2002,p.46).Today,thedivisionofdutiesbetweenawomanandamanrelies lessand lessonthebasisofmembershipofaparticular sex,butmoreoften it isbasedon thecon‐sensus of both partners. In recent years, support for the partnershipmodelofthefamily, inwhichpartnersspendroughlythesameamountoftimeonacareerandequallyoccupyhomeandtakecareforchildrensignificantlyincreases2(44%in2000comparedto35%in1994).________________

2AccordingtotheCentralStatisticalOffice(GUS–GłównyUrządStatystyczny)wom‐en devote three times more time than men on household duties. In the Time BudgetSurvey 2013we find that ‘household duties are the domain for 85%women and only44%men’.


Therefore, the family becomes “a negotiation terrain” (Sikorska,2009,p.156),anareaofcontactingofcompletelyseparatepersonalitiesand it is referred toas a “democratic, partner, egalitarian,wherebasicprinciple is emotional and gender equality” (Sikorska, 2009, p. 151).Emphasizing the subjectivity and autonomy of the individual is veryevident in both the female–male relationships (the right to self‐ful‐fillment,development,affiliatedivisionof responsibilities,etc.),aswellasparent‐child(promotionofpartnermodelofupbringing, theconvic‐tionoftheneedtorespecttheopinionandthewillofthechildren,etc.).Eachmember of the family is therefore entitled to have its own plansand goals and the right to pursue one’s happiness. Individualism alsomeansthateachpersonanditsactivities,notaclassorabackground,isthebasisfordeterminingtheplaceinthesocialstructure.

Individualization, which is the background of contemporary phe‐nomena and immersed in it motherhood, seem not to have toomanyfeaturesincommon.Whiletheemphasisinindividualizationisfocusedonisolatedfromthebroadersocialcontextunit,motherhoodemphasiz‐es the importance of establishing and maintaining relationships withother people, in extreme perspectives, even sacrificing oneself, ownplansandneedsforothers.MartaOlcoń‐KubickaarguesafterElisabethBeck‐Gernsheimthat“parentingisnotincompatiblewiththeprocessofindividualization,butonthecontrary,itmaybeitsprimarydimension”(Olcoń‐Kubicka, 2009, p. 40). The researcher justifies its position notonly by changeswithin the family,which becomes as a personal biog‐raphya‘do‐it‐yourself’project,inwhichindividuals,notsocialnormsorcultural,decideonitscourse,butalsobytheprocessoffetishizationofthechild,whichallowstoexperiencestatesandfeelingsnotavailableinother way, than in the parent‐child relationship. In addition, self‐fulfillmentisoneofthemostimportantculturalvaluesofindividualism.Beingamothernowadaysisseenas“anessentialelementofawoman’sself‐fulfillment”(Olcoń‐Kubicka,2009,p.40).

Self‐fulfillment defined as “not only retaining the appropriate bal‐ancebetweentheutilitarianmotiveandselflessaction,butalsousingofcapitalwhichisavalueforitsown”(Jacyno,2007,p.204)perfectlyem‐bodiesinthecyberrealityofbloggingandrunninge‐business.Women’sblogsore‐businessesaremostlytheresultoftheirpassions,interests—inaword—anessentialpartoftheirlifestylewhilethiskindofasitua‐tion,when“theworkbecomestheobjectofstyling,andworkstylebe‐comespart of thewayof life” (Jacyno,2007, p. 71) is oneof thebasic

96 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

parametersofindividualizationera.Cyberspaceisalsoanidealtoolfor“experiencing oneself inmany different styles andways of being” (Ja‐cyno,2007,p.105),whichprocessesunderlieafulllife.“Makingoneselftheobjectandinstrumentofactivity,givestheindividualtheopportuni‐tytoselectandcreateitself”(Jacyno,2007,p.179).

AnalyzingAmericanmommybloggersRebeccaPowellobserves,thatincaseofthesewomen“motherhoodexpandedtheirsubjectivities.Itdidnot do away with them. (…) Subjectivities from before motherhoodbleedover, infiltrate thepresent andmake it habitable” (Powell, 2010,p.46).

REFERENCES

BAEL (2010) Badanie Aktywności Ekonomicznej Ludności 2010. Available from:www.stat.gov.pl[Accessed:6thMay2013].

BARAN,T.&MIOTK,A.(2013)BlogerzywPolsce2013.Availablefrom:http://pbi.org.pl/aktualnosci/Blogerzy%20w%20Polsce%202013%20(18kwi13).pdf[Accessed:2ndMarch2013].

BUDROWSKA,B.(2000)Macierzyństwojakopunktzwrotnywżyciukobiety.Warsza‐wa:WydawnictwoFunna.

BUKOWSKI,M. (2010)ZatrudnieniewPolsce2008.Pracawcyklu życia.Warszawa:Instytut Badań Strukturalnych. http://analizy.mpips.gov.pl/images/stories/publ_i_raporty/Raport_zatrudnienie_w_Polsce_2008.pdf

CARR, D. (2005)Mothers atwork.Trends. Available from: http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~carrds/publications/momsatwork.pdf[Accessed:23thApril2013].

CICHOŃ,M.etal.(2013)Bibliae‐biznesu.Gliwice:Helion.CYWONIUK,M.(2008)Karierazawodowakobiet.In:Sadowska‐Snarska,C.,TchonLi

(eds.) (2008)Godzeniepracyzrodzinąwkontekścieaktywizacjizawodowejko‐biet. Białystok: Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomicznej. Available from:http://www.wse.edu.pl/wse/userfiles/file/publikacje_pdf/Godzenie_pracy_z_rodzina.pdf[Accessed:12thJune2013].

FELIKSIAK,M.(2013) Internauci2013.Warszawa:CBOS.Available from:http://www.cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2013/K_075_13.PDF[Accessed:2ndMarch2013].

FINE‐DAVIES,M.etal. (2004)FathersandMothers:Dilemmasof theWork‐LifeBal‐ance:AComparativeStudy.SocialIndicatorsResearchSeries.Volume21.KluwerAcademicPublishes.

FUSZARA, M. (2002) Kobietyw Polsce na przełomiewieków. Nowy Kontrakt płci?Warszawa:InstytutSprawPublicznych.

GARAPICH,A.(2011)ZasięgblogosferywPolsce.PolskieBadaniaInternetu.Availablefrom: http://www.slideshare.net/domino00/blogosfera‐w‐liczbach [Accessed: 5thMarch2013].

GIDDENS,A.(2007)Nowoczesność itożsamość.Warszawa:WydawnictwoNaukowePWN.


GIZA‐POLESZCZUK,A. (2009)Zakończenie,czylichcieć imóc. In:Sikorska,M.(ed.)ByćrodzicemwewspółczesnejPolsce.Nowewzorywkonfrontacjizrzeczywisto‐ścią.Warszawa:WydawnictwaUniwersytetuWarszawskiego.

HAYS,S.(1998)TheCulturalContradictionsofMotherhood.YaleUniversityPress.HOFFMAN,L.W.&YOUNGBLADE,L.M.(1999)MotheratWork:EffectsonChildren’s

Well‐being.CambridgeUniversityPress.HRYCIUK,R.E.&KOROLCZUK,E.(eds.)(2012)PożegnaniezMatkąPolką?Dyskursy,

praktyki ireprezentacjemacierzyństwawewspółczesnejPolsce.Warszawa:Wy‐dawnictwaUniwersytetuWarszawskiego.

IBOSiRMILLWARDBROWN(2006)Macierzyństwoapracazawodowakobiet.Zper‐spektywykobiet‐matek.Warszawa:FundacjaŚwiętegoMikołaja.

JACYNO, M. (2007) Kultura indywidualizmu. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo NaukowePWN.

KOTOWSKA, I. E (2009) Zmiany aktywności zawodowej kobiet a modele rodzinywEuropie.In:Sikorska,M.(ed.)ByćrodzicemwewspółczesnejPolsce.Nowewzo‐ry w konfrontacji z rzeczywistością. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa UniwersytetuWarszawskiego.

KROPIWNICKI, R. et al. (2008) Strategia przełamywania barierw stosowaniu ela‐stycznychformzatrudnienia.Legnica:AgencjaRozwojuRegionalnegoArleg.

KRZYŻANOWSKA,Ł.&WIŚNICKA,M.(2009)Zwózkiempodgórkę,czyliocodzien‐nych uciążliwościach macierzyństwa. In: Sikorska, M. (ed.) Być rodzicem wewspółczesnej Polsce. Nowewzoryw konfrontacji z rzeczywistością. Warszawa:WydawnictwaUniwersytetuWarszawskiego.

OLCOŃ‐KUBICKA,M.(2009)RolaInternetuwpowstawaniunowegomodelumacie‐rzyństwa.In:Sikorska,M.(ed.)ByćrodzicemwewspółczesnejPolsce.Nowewzorywkonfrontacji z rzeczywistością.Warszawa:WydawnictwaUniwersytetuWar‐szawskiego.

PADAVIC,I.&RESKIN,B.F.(2002)WomenandMenatWork.SagePublications.PERTIERRA, R. (2007) The Transformative Capacities of Technology: Computer‐

Mediated Interactive Communications in the Philippines‐Promises of the Pre‐sentFuture.In:Pertierra,R.(ed.)TheSocialConstructionandUsageofCommuni‐cationTechnologies.AsianandEuropeanExperiences.TheUniversityofthePhil‐ippinesPress.

PETERS, J. K. (1997)WhenMothersWork:LovingOurChildrenWithout SacrificingOurSelves.Addison‐Wesley:DaCapoPress.

POWELL, R. (2010) GoodMothers, BadMothers andMommyBloggers: RhetoricalResistanceandFluidSubjectivities.AnOnlineFeminist Journal.Available from:http://academinist.org/wp‐content/uploads/2010/02/03_Powell_Bloggers.pdf[Accessed:11thJuly2013].

SIKORSKA,M.(2009)Nowamatka,nowyojciec,nowedziecko.Onowymukładziesiłwpolskichrodzinach.Warszawa:WydawnictwoWAiP.

SLANY,K.&KLUZOWA,K. (2004)Przemianyrealizacji funkcjiprokreacyjnejwro‐dzinie. In: Mierzwiński, B. & Dybowska, E. (eds.)Obliczewspółczesnej rodzinypolskiej.Kraków:WAM.

TIME BUDGET (2013)TimeBudget Survey 2013. Available from: http://internationalbudget.org/wp‐content/uploads/OBI2013‐Report‐English.pdf [Accessed: 3rdMay2013].

98 ALICJA ORTYNECKA

TITKOW,A. (2007)Tożsamośćpolskichkobiet:ciągłość,zmiana,konteksty.Warsza‐wa:WydawnictwoIFiSPAN.

TITKOW,A.(ed.)(2003)Szklanysufit:barieryiograniczeniakarierkobiet:monogra‐fiazjawiska.Warszawa:InstytutSprawPublicznych.

TITKOW,A.,DUCH‐KRZYSTOSZEK,D.&BUDROWSKA,B.(2004)Nieodpłatnapracakobiet–mity,realia,perspektywy.Warszawa:WydawnictwoIFiSPAN.

TWÓJSTYL(2005)TwójStyl.June.p.47.URBAŃSKA, S. (2009)Matkamigrantka. Perspektywa transnarodowościw badaniu

przemianrólrodzicielskich.UniwersytetWarszawski.Availablefrom:http://www.ekologiasztuka.pl/pdf/urbanska_transnarodowe_macierzynstwo_2009.pdf [Acces‐sed:24thApril2013].

WARRIER, S. (1988) Marriage, maternity, and female economic activity: Gujaratimothers in Britain. In: Bhachu, P. &Westwood, S. (eds.) Enterprisingwomen:Ethnicity,EconomyandGenderRelations.London:Routledge.

ZIELIŃSKA, E. (2002) Sytuacja kobietwPolscew świetle zmian legislacyjnych. In:Fuszara, M. (ed.) Kobietyw Polsce na przełomiewieków.Nowy Kontrakt płci?Warszawa:InstytutSprawPublicznych.

ZNANIECKA‐LOPATA,H.(1973)Occupation:housewife.OxfordUniversityPress.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

MelindaR.PiersonCalifornia State University Fullerton (USA)

DustinGowanCalifornia State University Fullerton (USA)

Decoding multisyllabic words: Structural analysis in reading by groups

ABSTRACT. An age appropriate, research‐based systematic program that teaches a flexiblestrategy fordecoding multisyllabic words maybethefoundation for increasedreading abili‐ties ofmiddle school male and female students struggling with grade level text. Tomeetthis need, theREWARDS reading program (Archer,Gleason&Vachon,2000) wasused withstruggling 6thgradereaders withlearningdisabilities (LD).Thequasi‐experimentalresearchdesignusedin thisstudy isnon‐randomized control group(n = 20),pretest‐posttest design.TheBasicReading Inventory alongwithDIBELSmeasure ofreadingfluency weretheinstru‐ments usedtocalculate findings.Inafiveweekperiod,students’decoding levelsincreased by1.72grade levels, instructional readinglevels increased by1.45 grade levels,while the read‐ing fluency rates were increased by28% at instructional reading levels and 17% at gradelevel.Decodingabilitywashighlycorrelated to readingcomprehension with the relationshipof.88.

KEYWORDS:decoding,multisyllabicwords,readingbygroups

Introduction

Reading difficulties

Reading isan integral aspectof life.Understanding what isread iscrucial to academic success. This is especially true for students withlearning disabilities (LD). It is not uncommon for this population ofsecondary school studentstoreadsignificantlybelowgrade level,mak‐ing academic success challenging. Nagey and Anderson (1984) foundthat each year students in the middle grades read between 100,000and10,000,000words, 10,000 ofwhichare new, and a greatmajorityaremultisyllabic (Cunningham,1998). A great readingdisparity existsin individuals as is indicated by the number ofwords read yearly. If

100 MELINDA R. PIERSON, DUSTIN GOWAN

reading deficits are not remediated, the disparity between the profi‐cient andpoorwillcontinueto increase.Thisisknownasthe“MathewEffect” inreading; itapplies tostudentswithLDastheexampleof“thepoorgetpoorer”(Stanovich,1986,p.382).

The impactof this disparity ontheself‐esteem ofpoor readers af‐fects their likelihood of completing high school while increasing thelikelihood of these students exhibiting challenging behavior (Juel,1996). Seventy‐five percent of unemployed adultsand 60% of prisoninmates are illiterate (Orton Dyslexia Society, cited in Fuchs et al.,1991). Twenty‐five percent of adults cannot read directions onapre‐scription, ordecode anotesent home from school—they arefunction‐ally illiterate. Illiteracy figures are even more staggering for adultswith LDwith estimates as high as 73% (Riley, 1996).These statisticsshould inspire educators to find the most effective methods for pro‐motingstudents’readingdevelopment.

Difficulties haveemerged with thetraditionalapproach toteachingdecoding.Decoding strategies are usually confined to primary gradesand limited to monosyllablewords. Although most readers implicitlylearn howtoapply thesestrategies to longerwords, students with LDoften need explicit instruction (Carnine, Silbert & Kameenui, 1997).Older students have been taught strategies which are based on com‐plicatedsyllabication rulesorthat prescribed rotelearning ofcommonphonogram patterns. Canny and Scheiner (1976) state that “neitherinstructionalapproachledto improveddecodingperformance”(p. 123).These syllabication rules, which emphasized consonant combinationsand locations, placed littlevalueonvowelsounds.Theability todividewords into dictionary syllables neither proved to bean indication ofreading ability norwasreading abilityeven related tothisskill. Cannyand Schreiner (1976) suggest amoreflexible approach forword divi‐sion neededtobeexplored intheclassroom.

Therefore, anageappropriate, research‐based systematic programthat teaches aflexible strategy fordecoding multisyllabic words isthefoundation for increaseddecoding,reading fluency andcomprehensionabilities ofsecondary school studentsstruggling with grade level text(Archer, Gleason & Vachon, 2003). Reading Excellence:Word Attackand Rate Development Strategies or REWARDS is designed for thispopulation (Archer, Vachon &Gleason, 2000). The purpose of thisstudy is to determine ifREWARDS is a valid means of increasing thedecoding, reading fluency, and reading comprehension skills of 6th

Decoding multisyllabic words: Structural analysis in reading by groups 101

grade boysandgirls with LD. Another question was to determinetherelationship between decoding skillsandreading comprehension abil‐ity forthestudents inthisstudy.

Reading research

Theultimatepurposeofreadingiscomprehension(Stanovich,1991)orunderstandingwhathasbeenread.Inordertoincreasereadingcom‐prehension,fluencymustbeattained.Fluency istheabilityto readwithspeed, accuracy, and expression. Accuracyandspeed are increased byimprovedwordrecognitionskills.Wordrecognitionreferstolinkingtheprintedrepresentationofawordwithitsmeaning.Decodingistranslat‐ingprintedwordsintoarepresentationsimilartoorallanguage,andthusdecoding facilitates word recognition (Carnine, Silbert & Kameenui,1997; Stanovich,1991). Therefore,it becomesobvious that if studentscannotreadgradelevelmaterialsbecauseofdecodingdifficulty,theywillbeunabletoreadwithfluencyorcomprehendmuchofwhattheyread.

Decoding instruction research

Decodinghasgenerallybeentaughtthroughphonics.Phonicsinstruc‐tionisameansofteaching readingthatstressestheacquisitionofletter‐soundcorrespondences andtheir usein readingand spelling(NationalReadingPanel [NRP], 2000). Phonics instruction is built upon the as‐sumptionthatstudentsareawarethatspokenwordsaremadefromdis‐cretespeechsounds,orphonemes.Oncethisawarenessisdevelopedandstudents are able to manipulate sounds within words, the alphabeticprinciple is applied (Adams, 1999). The alphabeticprinciplestates allphonemesinorallanguagehavecorrespondingsymbolicrepresentationsknownasletters(Carnine,Silbert& Kameenui,1997).Readingprogramsthatare basedon explicitdirect instruction in thealphabetic principlehave shown great advantages when working with at‐risk children inpreventingreadingfailure(Foormanetal.,1998).

TheNRP’s (2000) meta‐analysis revealed five major categories ofphonics instruction.Analogyphonicsteachesstudentstocompareunfa‐miliarwordstowordsstudentsalreadyknow.Anexampleofphonicsbyanalogybeginsbyrecognizingthattherimeorfinalsegmentofanunfa‐


miliarwordissimilartoonethatisfamiliarthenbyblendingtheknownrime with the newword’s onset or initialword portion. The analyticphonics method teaches students to analyze letter‐sound relations inpreviously learnedwords. Thepurposeof thismethodis to avoidpro‐nouncingsoundsinisolation.Analyticphonicsmaybepracticedbydraw‐inga strugglingstudent’s attentiontoavowelsound in aknownwordand then by applying it to a new, unknownword.Embedded phonicsincorporatesphonicsinstructionintotextreading.Thisimplicitmethodreliesonincidental learning.Phonicsisalsotaughtthroughspellingles‐sons.Thisteachesstudents tosegmentwordsintophonemesandselectletters for thosephonemes (spelling phonetically).The finalmethod isknownassyntheticphonicsinstruction.Thismethodisbasedontheideathatstudentsshouldbetaughtexplicitlytoconvertgraphemesintopho‐nemesandthenblendthephonemes intorecognizablewords.TheNRPfoundthatsyntheticphonicsprogramswhichemphasizeddirectinstruc‐tionenhancedchildren’ssuccessinlearningtoread.Systematicsyntheticphonics instruction is significantly more effective than other phonicsinstructionmethodsforstudentswithlearningdisabilitiesandstudentswhoarelow‐achieving.

As students’ word recognition skills increase, they are able to usepatternsandanalogytodecode—mostdecodingisperformedbyfindingfamiliar patterns in words; the patterns are often morphemes—rootwords, suffixes,andprefixes (Cunningham&Cunningham,2002).Eng‐lishisamorphologicallyconnectedlanguageanditisestimatedthatforevery word you know, you can quickly learn between six and sevenotherwordssharingthesamemorpheme(Nagy&Anderson,1984).Theproblemstrugglingreaderspossess isthat thepartitionedunitswithinwords they process are too small; poor readers pronounce unfamiliarwords byindividual soundswithoccasional blends,andastheunitsofrecognition are increased, reading changes to a more holistic processthat leads to automaticity (Samuels, LaBerge & Bremer, 1978). Eyemovementstudiesindicatethatthehumanbrainrecognizesknownpat‐ternswithwords (Rayner&Pollatesk,1989) and direct instructionofpatternswithinwordsmaybetheanswerto theeverincreasingmulti‐syllabicwordreading(Cunningham,1998).

Structural Analysis teaches students to decodemultisyllabicwordsthrough the recognition of root words, prefixes, and suffixes (Carnine,Silbert & Kameenui, 1997); thus, increasing the size of the units pro‐cessedinmultisyllabicwords.Itisaflexiblestrategyratherthanasetof


fixed rules to memorize, and this strategy flexibility leadsto a greaterlikelihood of generalization (Lenz &Hughes, 1990). Students’ readingerrorswerereducedwhentheywereinstructed inastructuralanalysisbasedstrategy(Lenz&Hughes,1990).Thepromiseofenhancedreadingability provided by such programs is great for students with learningdisabilities in secondary schools who are unable to effectively readmultisyllabic words, and therefore sacrifice their levelof readingcom‐prehension and limit academic success. One such program is entitledREWARDS(Archer,Vachon&Gleason,2000).Itisashort‐terminterven‐tion thatteachesstrugglingreadersaflexibledecodingstrategytoreadlonger words which contain most of the meaning in text. REWARDSalsofocusesonfluencyinstruction.

Research validation of REWARDS

In recognition that 74% of students with reading disabilities inthird grade continue to have significant reading challenges in ninthgrade (Lyon, 1995), REWARDSprovides systematic instruction in de‐coding. As Moats (2001) stated, secondary students need systematicinstruction in age appropriate material in order to remediate readingdiscrepancies. REWARDS uses careful wording in its scripted deliveryas tonotoffendthesensitivities ofthispopulation of adolescents. Theimportance of this characteristic is self‐apparent to anyone who hasworkedwiththispopulationofstudents.

Phonics instruction

Inorder for phonicsmaterial to beeffective, itmust besystematicwith direct‐instruction (Swanson, 1999). REWARDS is intensive in itslevelofdirectinstruction.Itcarefullyteaches thepreskills tothedecod‐ing strategy before introducing it in total. Students are given directinstruction in diphthongs, referred to as “vowel combinations,” andextensive reviewopportunities areprovided.Areviewofvowelsoundsis provided and common confusion is eliminated that results fromnaming vowelphonemes“short”and“long” becausevowel sounds arethe same length. Therefore, a vowel’s two phonemes are referred toas the vowel’s “sound” and “name.” All vowels are then practiced in


“word parts” that are common portions of larger words students arelikelytoencounterduringfuturereading.

Studentswithreading disabilities aremore likely tomispronounceaffixes anddisregard largeportionsof letter information, and arefourtimes more likely to omitsyllables (Sheflebine &Callhoun, 1991). RE‐WARDS provides direct instruction in common prefixes and suffixes.Theseareintroduced insmall numberandreviewed daily.Thiscriticalcomponent was proven essential because it provides students withalternative decodable chunks, or visual patterns, within multisyllabicwords (Sheflebine, 1990).Cunningham (1998) found that by teaching50wordswiththemostcommonaffixes, itwouldgivestruggling read‐ersaccesstoover800otherwords.Explicitdirectinstructioninprefix‐es and suffixes may provide students access to thousands of wordspreviouslyunreadable tothem.Studentsarethengivenpracticeoppor‐tunities toidentifytheseaffixes inwordsandtaught thatnotallwordshave“beginning” or“ending”wordparts.

Oralactivitieswhichprovidestudents theopportunity toblendsyl‐lables are provided. Syllables are first presented by the teacher ataslow pace andthen by askingstudents “What word?”Opportunitiesare provided for students to find alternative pronunciations for mis‐pronouncedwords.Sheflebine (1990) indicates theimportance offind‐ing alternative pronunciations until a match was found in their ownlexicon. Thiscorrective procedure ispracticeddailywithwhole groupchoral response to eliminate isolating individual students who makemiscues. Intermediate‐agestudentswith learningdisabilitiesmadesig‐nificant gainsonmultiplemeasuresofword recognitionwhen a“part‐by‐part” decodingstrategywasgiven for fourweeksand involvedstu‐dents drawing loops under pronounced syllables (Archer, Vachon &Gleason, 2003). REWARDS expands on this strategy having studentscircleprefixes,thenbycirclingsuffixes,andbyunderliningvowelgraph‐emesintheremainingsectionofthemultisyllabicword.Studentssoundoutthemiddleportion(knowingthatforeachvowelsound,thereisoneword part or syllable), then pronounce the parts in sequence, whichfinallyleadstosayingthewordandaccessingitfromtheirlexiconmak‐ing it a“real word.”Withouttheabilitytodecode multisyllabicwords,studentswillnotreadwithadequatefluencyandthusnotgainaccesstothemeaningofwhatisbeingread.Therefore,increasingreadingfluencyisacriticalaspectofimprovingthedecodingskillsofolderstudentswithlearningdisabilities.


Reading fluency research

Someone who reads fluently gives little conscious attention to de‐coding (Meyer & Felton, 1999). Struggling readers givemuch of theirfinitecognitive resourcestodecoding,andthusoftenmissthemeaningof what has been read (LaBerge &Samuels, 1974). Reading becomesalaborioustasktobeavoided;thus,strugglingreaderswhoaremostinneedofdaily readingpracticeexperiencedelays in thedevelopmentofautomaticity (Moats,2001).They aremore likelyto performpreferredactivitiessuchaswatchingtelevisionratherthancompletinghomeworkassignments,possiblyduetoexperienceddifficulties in readingfluency(Archer,Gleason&Vachon,2003).Therefore,strugglingreadersrequirefrequent structured fluency practice incorporated into their academiclivestodecreasetheMathewEffectinreadingandincreaseoverallaca‐demicsuccess.

Readingpracticeisgenerallyrecognizedasanimportantcontributorto fluency. Guided oral reading encourages students to read passagesorallywithsystematic,explicitguidanceandfeedbackfromtheteacher.Guidedoral reading is a wayfor teachers to effectively model readingwithproperrate,pronunciation,andprosodyinsmallgroupsettingsaslisteningtogoodmodelsoffluentreading,studentslearnhowareader’svoice can help textmakesense (Kuhn&Stahl,2003).TheNRP (2000)concludedthat guidedoral reading procedures that included guidancefromteachers,peers,orparentshad“asignificantandpositiveimpact”onwordrecognition,fluencyandcomprehensionacrossarangeofgradelevels(p.12).

Passage reading is incorporated into REWARDSas it provides theopportunity for fluency building. Guided reading practiced in isolationmayfailtoprovidetheneededreadingpracticeforstrugglingsecondarystudents.Thus,REWARDSadvocatestheuseofchoralreading inwhichstudents readthepassagesimultaneouslywiththeteacher inunisonasthisinsuresgreaterparticipation, andallowsfor increasedpracticeop‐portunities (Rasinski et al.,1994).Theclozemethod is also suggested:theteacher reads thepassage aloudandpausesperiodically,cuingstu‐dentstorespondchorallytothenextword;thisisausefulwaytomoni‐torstudentparticipation.Partner reading isalsosuggested as it allowsstudents additional repeatedreadings with a peer. Fuchset al. (2001)found that the use of partner reading significantly improved readingfluencyscoresonmultiplemeasuresforstrugglingreaders.


Samuels (1979) concluded that some students were not buildingfluency whenreading orally because they seldom had theopportunityto read any selection more thanonce.Effective repeated reading pro‐cedures containtwocomponents:(1)theyprovidestudents withmanyopportunities to practice reading, and (2) they provide students withguidance in how fluent readers read insuring feedback to increaseawarenessandcorrectionoftheirmistakes (Osborn&Lehr,2003).Thisguidanceandfeedback cancomefrompeers,parents orteachers (NRP,2000). REWARDS advocates the use of repeated readings in passagereading sections to improve fluency. After the teachermodelsfluencythrough choral reading or the cloze method, the students are given aoneminute individual practice.Next,thestudents separateandpart‐ner read, providing one another feedback on miscues. Pairs shouldinclude a relatively high and low reader. After several practice ses‐sions, students exchange books andread foroneminute, each in turnunderlining anymiscues of the other. This final reading is used to de‐termine the Words Correct per Minute (WCM). Fluency scores aregraphedprovidingstudentsvisualrepresentations ofprogress.

Research summary

The ultimate purpose of reading instruction isto improve readingcomprehension. If students have difficulty with decoding, these skilldeficits need tobeaddressed tobridgethe growing reading disparity.Decoding hasbeenaddressed through variousmethods, buttomaxim‐ize effectiveness, initial phonics instruction should be systematic andsynthetic. Once students word recognition skills are improved, phon‐ics instructionbased on analogy which provides direct instruction inmorphemes isbeneficial.Structuralanalysisteachesstudentstodecodemultisyllabic words through the recognition of root words, prefixes,andsuffixes. REWARDS teaches aflexible strategy basedon structuralanalysis to decode multisyllabic words and provides exercises de‐signed to increasereading fluency.However, despite thefact that thisprogram is based on researchvalidated principles, there are no inde‐pendent studies validating theoutcomes of a 1.5grade level increaseas stated by the authors of REWARDS (Archer, Gleason & Vachon,2003). Therefore, it is hypothesized that the REWARDS interventionwill increase sixth grade students with learning disabilities decodinglevels,whichwillleadtoincreasedreadingfluency,andoverall gainsin


reading levels of 1.5 grades. Itis also predicted that there is a strongcorrelation between decoding and reading comprehension. The nullhypothesis isthatREWARDSwillnotleadtosignificant gains indecod‐ing, reading fluency, or overall reading levels of 6th grade studentswith learning disabilities and that there is no significant relationshipbetweendecoding skill levelsandreadingcomprehension.

Methodology

Themiddleschoolfromwhichthestudentparticipantswereselectedwas located in a lower middle‐class neighborhood in the suburbs ofLos Angeles, California. The student body was comprised of approxi‐mately 1,200 students with 83% Hispanic, 12% white non‐Hispanic,3%Asian, and2%from variousotherracialandcultural backgrounds.Theschoolwasselected due to theinvestigator’saccess toitsstudentsenrolled in special education. Permission from the principal and par‐ents ofparticipating students was acquiredtocollect data from an in‐tervention already in use. The purpose of thestudy wasdescribed totheadministration and parents asthevalidation ofadistrict‐endorsedreadingintervention taught bythe researcher to students withspecialneedsduring thespring of2004. Datawould becollected on studentswho had participated in the intervention andwould include decodinglevels,readingfluency,andreadingcomprehension scores.

Participants

The convenience sample consisted of 22 6th grade students whowerepartoftheresearcher’s caseload ofspecial education students inaResource SpecialistProgram(RSP)whohadparticipated inthe inter‐vention.Of these students, 20 consent forms were obtained. The stu‐dents qualified for Special Education Services understate and federalrequirements and all had Individualized Education Plans (IEP) withobjectivesintheareaof reading.

The participants’ethnic and racial backgroundswere representa‐tiveof theschool’soverallpopulation;80% of the populationwas His‐panic, and 20% was White, non‐Hispanic. The sample consisted of 11 boys and9girls—allofwhomwere designatedwithLD.


Research instruments

Twoprimaryinstrumentswereusedinthedatacollectionprocedure.Thefirst instrumentusedwastheBasicReadingInventory(BRI)(Johns,2001).First,gradedword listswereusedtodeterminethestudents’de‐codinglevel.Thedecodinglevelwasusedtodeterminetheinitialreadingcomprehensionpassage;thesepassagesprovidedcontextualwordidenti‐ficationmeasuresaswellasliteralandinferentialquestionswhichaidedin determining the reading comprehensionGE. The students’ independ‐ent,instructional,andfrustrationreadinglevelswerethendeterminedbyfactoring decoding ability with reading comprehension levels. Both theinstructional decoding andword recognition levelswere used in deter‐miningtheoveralldecodingGEforeachstudent.Thestatisticalmeande‐codingGEwascalculatedfromthesetwomeasures.

The second instrument usedwas the Dynamic Indicators of BasicEarly Literacy Skills (DIBELS) (Good& Kaminski, 2002). DIBELS areasetofstandardized,individuallyadministeredmeasuresforearlylitera‐cyskills.Eachmeasurehasbeenthoroughlyresearchedanddemonstrat‐ed tobe reliable andvalid indicatorsof early literacydevelopment.TheOral Reading Fluency subtests follow a curriculum‐based assessmentmodel in using 1‐minute timings to determine reading rates or fluency;four subtestswere readat the students’ individual instructional readinglevelsasdeterminedbytheBRI.ThesepassageswerescoredandvaluesexpressedinWCM.Thestatisticalmeanforreadingfluencywillbegener‐atedfromthefourreadingsforeachstudentasthishasbeendeterminedtobeavalidmethod(Kampset.al.,2003).

Data collection procedures

Thepretestmeasures weregiventobothgroupsoneweekpriortothe beginningof the intervention. The BRI was administered inorderto calculate reading levels.Students’ instructional reading levelswereused to administer the DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency subtest. Fourpassages atthestudent’sinstructional reading levelwereused togen‐erate ameanWCM. Also, four passages were administered at the stu‐dents’ grade level and mean WCM scores were calculated. The sameassessment procedures werefollowed oneweekafter the interventionandservedastheposttest


Intervention

Procedures were followed as outlined in the teacher training forpassage reading. This consisted of teacher modeled passage readingwith fluency and accuracy. Next, students were matched in groupsbased on ability, one stronger reader paired with a less proficientreader.The stronger readerread first toprovide anadditional model,while theother partner provided oral corrections; each student reada passage one timewith theother providing necessary feedback. Theresearcher listened brieflytoeachgroup toinsuremaximumparticipa‐tion. Students’ workbooks were exchanged and partners timed theother for one minute. The timer was also responsible for underliningerrors made by their partner while reading. These errors were sub‐tracted from the total words read to generate total WCM. Thesewerecharted forstudents’ visualfeedbackonreadingfluencyprogress.

Results

Decoding

Thepretestmean(M) decoding levelofthecontrol groupwas5.05GE and the intervention group pretest M = 3.25. The control groupposttest M = 5 .13 and the intervention group posttest M = 5.05. Thechange inthemean between the tests for thecontrol groupswas0.08grade level.Thechange inthemeanbetween tests fortheinterventiongroupwas1.8gradelevels.Whenthechange inMof thecontrol groupwas subtracted from theMchange of the intervention group (to ac‐countformaturation), therewasanetchangeof1.72gradelevels.

Table 1

Mean Decoding Levels

n = 1O Pre‐Test Post‐Test Growth

Control Group 5.05 5.13 0.08

Intervention Group 3.25 5.05 1.8

Note.Units expressed ingrade equivalency


Instructional reading levels

Results from the BRI mean instructional reading levels for bothgroups were determined. The control group pretestM = 4.6 GE, andthe intervention group pretestM = 3.4GE. Theposttest control groupM = 4.9, while the posttest intervention group M = 5.15. The changebetween tests for thecontrol group was 0.3 grade levels. The changebetween tests for the intervention group was 1.75 grade levels. Thechanges in between tests were subtracted to reach a total changeamong groupsof1.45gradelevels.

Table 2Mean Instructional Reading Levels

n = 10 Pre‐Test Post‐Test Growth

Control Group 4.60 4.90 .3

Intervention Group 3.40 5.15 1.75

Note. Units expressed ingrade equivalency

Reading fluency

Thepretest reading fluency score for thecontrol groupattheir in‐structional reading level was M = 78.08 WCM, and the interventiongroupwasM = 65.76WCM. Thecontrol group’sposttest score at theirinstructional reading level wasM = 91.45WCM,while the score of in‐tervention group was M = 84.15 WCM. Scores indicate increases of13.37 WCM forthecontrol group and18.37WCMfor theinterventiongroupatstudents’instructional readinglevels.

The pretest reading fluency score for the control group at gradelevelwasM = 85.16 WCMand68.65WCMfor the intervention group.The posttest score for the control group was 86.45 WCM. The inter‐vention group’s fluency measure wasM = 80.13WCM.Posttestscoresindicate increasesof1.29WCMforthecontroland11.48WCM for theintervention group(pleaserefertoTable 3fort‐testinformation.

Pearson r

ThePearson rwascalculated todiscover therelationship betweendecoding skill levels and reading comprehension ability. The entiresample of20students wasusedtogenerate thefigureof .88; this indi‐


cates that a strong relationship between decoding skill and readingcomprehension ability existswithin this study (please refer toFigure 1).Thet‐test for the Pearsonrwas referencedand theminimumlevel of.38was necessarytoreject the null hypothesis.

10 9 8 Decoding7 •(GE)6 • •Students5 •4 • • 3 • •2 1 0 2 4 6 8

ReadingComprehension(GE)

Figure 1.PearsonrCoefficientCorrelation

Note.Allscores reported ingrade equivalency (GE). Pearson r = .88.n = 20

Discussion

Theeffects of theREWARDS intervention upon this sample of stu‐dents wereevident in theoverall scores. Students showed significantgains in decoding and reading comprehension, with less significantgrowth in reading fluency. A strong correlation was demonstratedbetweendecoding skills andreadingcomprehension.

Decoding

Systematic, structural analysis based programs have been provensuccessful in teaching decoding and phonics to older students. RE‐WARDS emphasized both structured introductions and reviews of af‐fixes and vowel sounds, provided practice for identification of theseaffixes withinwords, andgavestudents aflexibledecodingstrategyformultisyllabic words. Lessons provided constant exposure to new vo‐cabularyaswell asextensive review. Students appeared to beable toread longer words with more efficiency and confidence. In addition,students’multisyllabic wordrecognitionandautomaticityincreased.


Students’ decoding levels increased by1.73grade levels ina five‐week period.Thecontrol group’sgainofonly0.08 GEduring thistimedemonstrate relatively expected gains for students not exposed tosystematic phonics instruction. Thus, thenullhypothesis was rejectedbased upon the outcome of the posttest decoding portion of theBRI.REWARDSis avalid meansof increasing sixth gradestudents with LDdecodingskills.

Instructional reading levels

Despite modifications and accommodations, students with LDareoftendeniedaccess tothecorecurriculum. Intuition alone informsonethat if students areunable todecode text, theywill have little successin understanding what hasbeen read;researchundoubtedly supportsthiscognition. With 80% ofallwords beingmultisyllabic andcontain‐ing at least one affix, the likelihood of comprehending text for stu‐dentsexperiencing decoding deficits decreases dramatically asstudentadvance through school. Therefore, increasing struggling readers’reading comprehension iscrucial toacademicsuccess.

Thecontrol group experienced gains of0.3GE inafive‐week peri‐od. For students who lag behind non‐disabled peers in reading com‐prehension, thistypeofgainisnotenough.Thisvulnerable populationwillnevercompensate fortheMathewEffect.Theywillcontinue tofallfurther behind with each passing day. Instructional reading levelsincreased by 1.45 grade levels which indicate thatREWARDSassistedthe intervention group to achieve significant gains in understandingwhattheyread.Theirmean instructional reading levelroseto5.15GE.Despite thissignificant gain,on average thesestudents will havediffi‐culty understanding 6th grade level text.Due to significant increasesby the intervention group ascompared to the controlgroup over thesame period oftime, the nullhypothesis was rejected asREWARDS isavalidmeansofincreasing students reading comprehension.

Reading fluency

Readingfluencyisanaturalextensionofdecodingskill.Researchsup‐ports the relationshipbetweenreading fluencyandreadingcomprehen‐sionbasedupontheideaoflimitedcognitiveresources;ifonespendsan


inordinateproportionofcognitiveenergyondecoding, there is little leftforcomprehension.Students’readingfluencyscoresattheirinstructionalreading levels increasedby18.37WCMandthecontrolgroup increasedby 13.37WCM. T‐test scores for both groups indicate that increases inreadingfluencywerenotlikelyduetochance.Theinterventiongroupout‐gainedthecontrolgroupongradelevelpassagesaswell.Theinterventiongroupincreasedby11.48WCMversusthecontrolgroup’s1.29WCM.Thet‐test score indicates that the gain demonstrated by the interventiongroupwassignificant,withthecontrolgroup’sinsignificantgainlikelyduetochance.Thereading fluencydata forREWARDSsupports theassump‐tion that it is an effective intervention for increasing reading fluencyscores for thepopulationand thus thenullhypothesis is rejected. Inter‐vention group increased by 28% and the control group by 17%whichseem significant, but students from both groups are still far below thegrade level expectancies of between 125 and 150WCM. On grade levelpassages,theinterventiongroup’sreadingrateincreasedby17%andthecontrol group’s by 2% Asindependent reading levels, students readingratesatgradelevelremainfarbehindgradelevelexpectancies.TheCon‐necticutLongitudinalStudyatAdolescence(1999)rightfullytitled“Persis‐tenceofDyslexia,” foundthatwhiledecodingandcomprehensionscoresmay be improved in students with reading disabilities, reading fluencymeasures lag drastically behind, sometimes never improving. StudentswithLDcontinuetostrugglereadingfluentlyevenafterreceivingtraining.They labor throughdifficult text andoftendevelop compensatory skills,suchasanover relianceoncontextclues, inorder tocomprehendwhatthey read. These students remain in the drowning world of word‐by‐wordreaders floodedbyanever increasing readingdemandnever fullydevelopingtheacademiclifesavingskillofprosody.

Decoding and reading comprehension

In conducting background research for this study, it became ap‐parent that the relationship between reading fluency and readingcomprehension was known, but the data for decoding and readingcomprehension was not as readily accessible. The relationship be‐tweendecoding andreading comprehension seems obvious, thereforestudies that provide this correlation measure are intriguing to thosefacilitating academicsuccess for struggling readersThePearson rwascalculated togeneratesuchafinding.


ThePearsonrwascalculated todiscover therelationship betweendecoding and reading comprehension. The entire sample of 20 stu‐dents was used to generate the figure of .88; this indicates a verystrong relationship between the two variables. Given that correlationdoesnotindicate causation, itissafetostate(withacorrelation of.88)thatimproving students’ decoding skill levelswill likelyincrease read‐ingcomprehensionabilities.

Differences among groups

Due to sampling procedures, significant differences emerged inreading abilities among groups. There were differences between theinstructional reading levels of eachgroup from theonset. The controlgroup was composed of significantly higher readers withM readinglevel 1.2 GE above the intervention group. Students in the controlgroupreadatahigherlevelandreadwithgreaterfluency.Suchsignifi‐cantdifferences amonggroupsmakecomparison tenuous.

Student outcomes

Student outcomes werepossibly limited due to behavior challeng‐es within theintervention group. Several students needed behavioralsupport throughout theintervention. Theoverarching dynamic of theintervention groupwasattimesvolatile.Outburstswerecommon, andclassroom management strategies beyond those suggestedby the au‐thorswerenecessary. Theintervention group required frequent moti‐vational conversations regarding the impact improved reading abili‐ties has on one’s life. Students complained of being bored with thecurriculum and its repetitive nature. This was the most challenginggroup the researcher had taken through REWARDS and stating thatoutcomesmaybegreater forothergroups isreasonable.

Future research

Promisingareasforfutureresearchemergedasaresultofthisstudy.Conductingthisexperimentusingmethodologyincorporatingprobabilitysamplingtoobtainagreatersamplesizewouldenablegreatergeneraliza‐


tion. This would provide professionals in education greater confidenceandsuretyinthefindings.Changesintheself‐perceptionofstudentshavebeenobservedastheirreadingskillimproved.Thequalitativegaininself‐confidence and self‐advocacy as a result of increased reading skill levelmay interest those in the fieldofSpecialEducation.With the findingsoftheConnecticutLongitudinalStudy(1999)astheyrelatetoreadingfluen‐cy, do structured reading fluency training programs offer studentswithLDlongtermreadingskillimprovement,orwouldtheybemorebenefitedbyothertypesofreadinginterventions?Thesearethreeareasimplicatedforfutureresearchgeneratedbythisstudy.

REFERENCES

ADAMS, M. J. (1990) Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.Cam‐bridge,MA:MITPress.

ARCHER, A.L.,GLEASON, M.M.& VACHON, V.L. (2000) REWARDSReading excel‐lence:Wordattackandratedevelopmentstrategies.Longmont,CO:SoprisWest.

ARCHER, A. L., GLEASON, M.M. & VACHON, V. L. (2003) Decoding and fluency:Foundationskills for struggling older readers. Learning Disabilities Quarterly.26(2).pp. 89–102.

ARY, D., JACOBS, L.,ASGHAR, R. (2002) Introduction to research ineducation. 6thed.Belmont,CA:Wadsworth.

CANNEY, G.& SCHREINER, R. (1976) Astudy of theeffectiveness of selected syl‐labication rules and phonogram patterns for word attack. Reading ResearchQuarterly. 2.pp.102–124.

CARNINE, D.W., SILBERT, J.& KAMEENUI, E. J. (1997) Direct instruction reading.3rded.NewJersey:PrenticeHall.

COHEN, J.(1988)Statistical poweranalysis forthebehavioral sciences.Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.

CUNNINGHAM, P.(1998) Themultisyllabic worddilemma: Helpingstudents buildmeaning,spell, and read“big”words.Reading&WritingQuarterly:OvercomingLearningDisabilities. 14.pp.189–219.

CUNNINGHAM,J. & CUNNINGHAM,P. (2002)What we knowabout how to teachphonics.In: Farstrup,E.&Samuels,S. J. (eds.)What Research HastoSayAboutReading Instruction. 3rd ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.pp. 90–109.

FOORMAN,B. R.etal. (1998,March) The role of instructionin learning to read:preventingreading failure inat‐risk children.Journal ofEducational Psychol‐ogy. 90(1).pp.37–55.

FUCHS, D. et al. (2001) Developing first‐grade fluency through peer mediationTeaching Exceptional Children. 34(2).pp.90–93.

GOOD, R. H. & KAMINSKI, R. A. (eds.) (2002)Dynamic indicators of basic earlyliteracyskills. 6th ed. Eugene,OR: Institutefor the Developmentof EducationAchievement.


JOHNS, J. (2001) Basicreading inventory.Dubuqe,IA:Kendall/Hunt.JUEL, C. (1996)What makes literacytutoringeffective?ReadingResearch Quarter‐

ly.31(3).pp.268–289.KAMPS, D.M.etal.(2003) Curriculuminfluenceson growth in early readingflu‐

ency for studentswith academic and behavioral risks: A descriptive study.JournalofEmotional andBehavioral Disorders.11(3).pp.211–224.

KUHN,M. R.&STAHL, S. A. (2003)Fluency:A reviewof developmentaland reme‐dialpractices.Journal ofEducational Psychology. 95.pp.3–21.

LABERGE, D.&SAMUELS, S. J. (1974) Toward a theory of automatic informationprocessing inreading.Cognitive Psychology. 6.pp.292–323.

LENZ, B. &HUGHES, C. (1990, March) A word identification strategy for adoles‐centswith learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 23. pp. 149–158,163.

LYON,G.R.(1995) Research initiatives in learning disabilities:Contributions fromscientists supported bytheNational Institute ofChild Health andHumanDe‐velopment. JournalofChildNeurology. 10.pp. 120–126.

MEYER, M.S.& FELTON, R.H. (1999) Repeated reading to enhance fluency: Oldapproaches andnewdirections.Annals ofDyslexia. 49.pp.283–306.

MOATS, L.C. (2001) When older students can’t read. Educational Leadership. 58.pp.36–40.

NAGY, W.&ANDERSON, R.(1984). How many words are there in printed schoolEnglish.ReadingResearchQuarterly. 19.pp.304–330.

NATIONAL READING PANEL. (2000) Teaching children to read: An evidence‐based.assessmentof the scientific research literature on reading and its im‐plications forreading instruction. Bethesda,MD: National Reading Panel.Na‐tional Institute ofChild HealthandHumanDevelopment.

OSBORN, J.&LEHR, F.(2003)A focuson fluency: Research‐based practices inearlyreading series.Honolulu, HI:Pacific ResourcesforEducation andLearning.

PERFETTI, C.A.(1985)Readingability.NewYork:Oxford Press.pp.118–212.RASINSKI, T.V.etal.(1994)Effects offluencydevelopment on urbansecond‐grade

readers.JournalofEducational Psychology.87.pp.158–165.RAYNER, K. & POLLATSEK, A. (1989) The psychology of reading.Massachusetts:

LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.RILEY, R.W. (1996) Improving the reading and writing skills of America’s stu‐

dents.LearningDisability Quarterly. 19(2).pp.67–69.SAMUELS, S.J.(1979) Themethodofrepeated readings.TheReadingTeacher. 32.

pp.403–408.SAMUELS, S. J., LABERGE, D.&BREMER, C. D. (1978) Units of word recognition:

Evidence for developmental changes. Journal of Verbal Learning and VerbalBehavior. 17.pp.715–720.

SHAYWITZ, S.E.etal.(1999). Persistenceofdyslexia:The Connecticut longitudinalstudy.Pediatrics. 104.pp.1351–1359.

SHEFLEBINE, J. (1990) A syllabic‐unit approach to teaching decoding of polysyl‐labic words to fourth‐ and sixth‐grade disabled readers. In: Zutell, J. &McCormick,S.(eds.),Literacy theoryandresearch:Analysis frommultiplepara‐digms.Chicago:National ReadingConference.pp.223–230.


SHEFELBINE, J. & CALHOUN, J. (1991) Variability in approaches to identifyingpolysyllabicwords:Adescriptive studyofsixth graderswithhighly,moderate‐ly, and poorlydeveloped syllabication strategies. In:Zutell,J.&McCormick,S.(eds.) Leamer factors/teachers factors: Issues in literacy research and instruc‐tion. Chicago:National Reading Conference.pp.169–177.

STANOVICH, K.E. (1986, Fall) Mathew effects in reading: Some consequences ofindividualdifferences intheacquisition ofliteracy.ReadingResearchQuarterly.21.pp.360–407.

STANOVICH, K.E. (1991) Word recognition: Changing perspectives. Handbook ofReadingResearch.Vol . 2.NewYork:Longman.pp.418‐452.

SWANSON, H. L. (1999) Instructional components that predict treatment out‐comes forstudents with LD: Support for a combined strategy anddirect in‐struction model.LearningDisabilities Research&Practice. 14.pp.129–140.


Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

AllaKrasuliaA. S. Makarenko State Pedagogical University in Sumy (Ukraine)

Women and philanthropy: The U. S. experience that could be transferred into the Ukrainian context of higher education

ABSTRACT.Anoverviewofwomen’s philanthropy and analysis of examples of philanthropicsupportforeducationalinstitutionsintheUSAwillbepresented.Issuesofgendercharitywillbe discussed and suggestions for creating fundraising opportunities for universities will beoutlined.

KEYWORDS:women’sphilanthropy,charity,volunteering,fundraising,highereducation

Exploringthesignificanceandvarietyofwomen’sphilanthrop‐icaction ineducation is importantbecausebothphilanthropyandeducationwereamongtheearliestspaceswherewomen,though still acting within culturally prescribed roles, foundopportunitiestoparticipateinthepublicsphere.

(Walton,2005,p.5).

Incomediversificationforuniversitiesisoneofthesignificantissueson the agenda of contemporary higher education (HE) and research.American higher education system is internationally respected asamodel of excellence for several of its unique characteristics, such asacademic freedom, broad‐based liberal education, professional MBAprograms,andrigorousdoctoraleducation.Anotherdistinguishing fea‐tureofAmericanHE is itsprofessionalandstrategicapproachto fund‐raising,whichprovidesacriticalsourceofincometouniversitiesinne‐oliberal timesofdecreasinggovernmentsupport topublicuniversities,and increasing tuition costs and global competition in the knowledgeeconomy. Philanthropyoffers a unique opportunity, in theseuncertaintimes of economic downturn, to ensure that the university’s voice isheard.

120 ALLA KRASULIA

Philanthropy and volunteering are deeply‐rooted American tradi‐tions.The first thing tonoteabout them is that, according to the2012World Giving Index (that shows how much people around the worldhavebeenableorwillingtohelptheirfellowmanandwoman,throughthe donation ofmoney, volunteering of time, andproffering of help tothosetheydonotknow),theUSAisinthelistofthe20countries(takingthe 5th place)with the highest scores. It boasts aWorld Giving Indexscoreof57%.Thismeansthatonaveragehalf thepopulation is takingpart in at least one of the three behaviours—donating money (57%),volunteering time (42%)andhelpinga stranger (71%)—onamonthlybasis(WorldGivingIndex,2012,p.13).Furthermore,theUnitedStatesof America belongs to the 10most generous countries in terms of theactualnumberofpeoplewhodonatedmoney(WorldGivingIndex,2012,p.20).Moreover,theUnitedStatesofAmericawasfoundtoboastcon‐siderablymorepeoplevolunteering their time thananyother country.With105millionvolunteers, it istheonlynationtoexceed100million(WorldGivingIndex,2012,p.24).

ThesecondthingtonoteaboutcharityintheUSAconcernsthemostcommon recipients of donations. As the Figure 1 shows they are reli‐giousgroups,education focusedorganizationsanduniversities,organi‐zationsthatfeedandeducatechildren,helpthepoorandthehomeless,supporthealthissuesandscientificresearchinmedicalfield,aswellasthose that dealwith arts, culture, and environmental issues. AmericanAssociation of Fundraising Counsel1 (AAFRC) Trust for Philanthropy2estimated(Figure2) thatabout8%ofsourcesofgivingwere frombe‐quests,20%ofdonationswerefromorganizations,and72%weregivenbyindividuals(GivingUSA,2014).

Nowadays charitable giving in the U.S. is not only attributed toawell‐off layer of society. Americanswho cannot donatemoney oftengivetheirtimeandsharetheirskillsbyvolunteeringatpublickitchens,________________

1AAFRChas changed itsname to theGiving Institute inMarch6,2006.Formed in1935, the organization represents fundraising counsel and consulting firms around theworld.ThegroupwasinstrumentalintheformationoftheNationalSocietyofFundRais‐ers,nowAFP,in1960.Thenewnamealsoreferstotheorganization’sannualpublication,“GivingUSA,”whichispublishedbytheorganization’sfoundation,theGivingUSAFoun‐dation. The AAFRC, now the Giving Institute, is one of themost respected institutionswithinthecharitablesector.http://www.aafrc.org/.

2TheAAFRCTrustforPhilanthropyisafoundationtoadvanceresearch,education,and public understanding of philanthropy that was founded in 1985 by the AmericanAssociationofFundraisingCounsel.

Women and philanthropy 121

Figure1.Source:GivingUSA,2014 Figure2.Source:GivingUSA,2014

tutoring children after school, delivering food to the elderly and disa‐bled.Peoplefromlowereconomicclassesalsodonate,althoughtheben‐eficiariesoftheirdonationstendtobesomewhatdifferent.Verygeneral‐ly speaking, they donate more to religious organizations. Besides, notonly adults volunteer their time and money. A great number of highschoolstudentsparticipateinvolunteeringactivitiesduringanacademicyear.

TraditionallyUSphilanthropyhasbeenattributedtoawhitewealthymanforalongtime.Thechangingroleofwomenincontemporarysocie‐tyhascreatednewopportunities for themtorealize theirpotential, tounleash their talents, to provide volunteer help and financial support,particularlyathighereducationinstitutionsservingthepublicgood.Oneof the most important contributions to describing the historical in‐volvement of Americanwomen in educational philanthropy is A.Wal‐ton’s researchWomen and Philanthropy in Education (2005). In thisworksheanalyseshowprosocialbehavior,inthiscasedonationoftimeand support of local educational initiatives, should be considered asvaluableassetforourunderstandingofhighereducationtoday.

Sinceatleasttheearly1800s,U.S.womenhaveparticipatedinshapingedu‐cationthroughphilanthropy…Indeed,byvolunteeringtheirtimeanddonat‐ingbothmoneyandgiftsin‐kind,womenhavefashionedcareersasphilan‐thropistsandeducators,haveusededucationtopromotesocialchange,and

Individuals $240.60

Foundations$48.96

Bequests$27.73

Notes: $335.17 billion by type of recipient organization(in billions of dollars – all figures are rounded) [Source: Giving USA, 2014]

$335.17 billion by source of contributions(in billions of dollars – all figures are rounded)

Source: Giving USA, 2014

Corporations$17.88

Education$52.07

Human services $41.51

Religion$105.53

Health $31.86

Gifts to foundations

$35.74

Gifts to individuals$3.70 (1%)

Arts, culture, and humanities $16.66

Public-society benefit$23.89

Environment/animals $9.72 (3%)

International affairs $14.93

122 ALLA KRASULIA

havebeeninstrumentalinestablishingandsustainingawidearrayofinsti‐tutionswhereeducationoccurs(Walton,2005,p.2).

Thispaperwillprovideanalysisofsomeofthepeculiaritiesofwom‐en’sphilanthropyinhighereducation.

It’s significant to point out that in gender‐blind research,women’sexperiences and contributions remain invisible, and, consequently, im‐portantaspectsofan issue remainundocumentedandunderestimatedand, therefore,maybemisunderstood (Leduc, 2009). Gender‐sensitiveresearchpaysattention to thesimilaritiesand thedifferencesbetweenmenandwomen’sexperiencesandviewpoints,andgivesequalvaluetoeach.Ithelpsbothmenandwomenconcernedbyaproblemtoanalyzean issue, understand its causes, and find solutions taking into accountage,socialandmaritalstatus,generationaldifferences,educationalandreligious backgrounds, income levels, etc. A gender‐sensitive researchmethodologyisusuallymoreparticipatoryandcancontributegreatlytoempoweringpeople,notablywomen(Callamard,1999;Leduc,2009).So,what are the key differences betweenmen andwomen as philanthro‐pists? What is women’s potential as philanthropists? What impact oncharitable giving does marital status have?What is the percentage ofwomen participating in charity?Do philanthropic behaviours differ bygender? Why is women’s philanthropy of increasing significance andinterestnowadays,particularlyinthefieldofeducation?

Thus,thepurposeofourresearchintermsofthispaperis,firstly,toexplore how the changing role ofwomen in contemporary society hascreatednewopportunities forwomen to contribute their time,energy,money for the development of education and, secondly, to find out bymeans of analysis which best practices of fundraising from women’sphilanthropy in the U.S. have the best potential for being transferredintotheUkrainiancontext.

Iftoaskpassers‐byinthestreetsofAmericancities,

Who is the firstperson that comes toyourmindwhenyouhear theword“philanthropist”?Mostrespondentswouldmore likelysayBillGates,War‐renBuffett,andGeorgeSoros.IfUkrainianswereaskedsuchaquestiontheywould probably recall businessmen and public activists, such as VictorPinchuk,boxersVitaliandVladimirKlitchkoorsomeregionallyknownben‐efactors.Uponqueryingtheword“philanthropist”intheGooglesearchen‐gine itprovides informationaboutmaledonorsonthefirst fewpages.Re‐cently, the Ukrainian magazine “Correspondent” presented the 10 mostgenerousbenefactorsofUkraineinitsranking(Корреспондент,2011).


Therewasonlyonewomanamongthem,VictorPinchuk’swife.Thisgivesusamotivetodiscussphilanthropyamongcouples,aswillbedonelater in thisarticle.Traditionally,women’sphilanthropyandsocialsta‐tus was tied to their husbands’ wealth. Thus, it’s reasonable to admitthat,inmostcountries,charityisassociatedwithmalenames.

Nevertheless, the historical perspective on women’s giving showsthat many determined and dedicated women have played significantroles in thehistoryofwomen’sphilanthropy in theUSA.Followingareonlyafewexamplesofthesetrailblazersinthefieldofhighereducation:

In1643LadyMowlson(AnnRadcliffe)endowedascholarshipfundforsonsofblacksmithsandfarmersatHarvard,createdjust7yearsear‐lier.MaryLyonwasapioneerinwomen’seducationinAmerica,found‐ingin1834theWheatonFemaleSeminarywhichbecameWheatonCol‐lege and the Mt. Holyoke Female Seminary in 1837 which becameHolyoke College. Sophie Smith opened Smith College and endowedaschoolforthedeafinNorthampton,Massachusettsin1875.MaryEliz‐abethGarrettmadealargedonationtotheJohnHopkinsMedicalSchoolunder the condition to openupmedical education forwomen in 1893providedthat theuniversityagreestoadmitwomenonthesamebasisas men. More recently, independent schools, colleges and universitieshavecelebratedsignificantgifts fromwomendonors.DarlaMoorewaspraisedforhergiftstotaling$70milliontotheUniversityofSouthCaro‐linainthelate1990s.JaneAddamswasawardedtheNobelPeacePrize,in1931, forherworkatHullHouse inChicago,whichprovidededuca‐tionalanddomestictrainingforwomenandimmigrants.MegWhitmangave $30 million to her alma mater, Princeton University, in 2002.AlumnaBarbaraDoddAndersoncontributed$128milliontotheGeorgeSchool, an independent secondary school outside of Philadelphia, in2007.And, in2009, JoannaKrotzspeculated that theanonymous$100milliondonortocollegesanduniversitieswasawoman(KrotzinWom‐en’sPhilanthropyInstitute,2009,p.6).

The history of Ukrainian charity is part and parcel of the nationalpast. As a social phenomenon, it is one of the oldest traditions thatcomes fromancient times.Theoriginsofphilanthropyare inextricablylinkedwiththeemergenceofanAncientKievRussstateinthe9thcen‐tury and the establishment of Christianity as the state religion, whensupport of the sick, the poor became a form of the realization of theChristiancommandmenttolovethyneighbour.Accordingtothehistori‐cal experience, the charitable initiativesofwomenwerenot limited to

124 ALLA KRASULIA

onlygivingalms“forthesakeofthesalvationoftheirownsouls”,whichhad more religious and emotional nature. That kind of assistance in‐creasingly extended beyond their personal interest and gradually re‐gainedaconscioussociallymeaningfulcharacterthatwasmadepossibleby the high social and juridical‐legal status of women in society. ItshouldbenotedthatUkrainianwomen,unlikeRussianwomenorthoseofWesternEurope,wereinitiallytreated,andconsequentlybehaved,asindependent and freedom‐loving persons. They had equal rights andfreedomswithmen,andwereactiveparticipantsinhistoricalprocesses:theyinfluencedpolitics,socialproduction,educationaldevelopment,andthesocial,spiritualandculturallifeofthecommunity(Ільченко,2012b,pp.89‐95).AsaUkrainianresearcherN.Polonskaya‐Vasilenkowrote

...ancientKievRusslawrecognizesawomantobeequaltoman;shetakesthesecondplaceafterherhusbandinthematrimonialsystem,butafterhisdeathshebecomestheheadofthefamily.FromthestoryaboutIgorandOl‐ga3wecansee thatwomenhadsignificant rightsat thedawnof thestate(Полонська‐Василенко,1965,p.49inІльченко,2012a,p.92).

Nevertheless, inouropinion,charityhasamalenameandafemaleface in the 21st century. It’s fair to assume thatmen are therewherepoliticsandmoneyare,whilecharityinmanycases,restsonfragilefe‐male shoulders. The US research shows that 84% of all donations aremade bywomen. This fact is confirmed bymen, 92% ofwhom admitthatwomen affect their decisions concerning charity inmost cases. IntheUnitedStates,onaverage,highnet‐worthwomengive3.5%oftheirtotalwealthtocharityeachyear,almostdoublethe1.8%givenbymen(Barclay’sWealthStudy,2009).Inaddition,womengivemorethanmentodifferentspheresofcharity(religion,health,education,environment,etc.).

________________ 3The Tale of Igor’s Campaign (Old East Slavic: Слово о плъку Игоревѣ, Slovo

o pŭlku Igorevě; Russian: Слово о полку Игореве, Slovo o polku Igoreve; Ukrainian:СловоополкуІгоревім,SlovoopolkuIhorevim)isananonymousepicpoemwritteninthe Old East Slavic language. The title is occasionally translated as The Song of Igor’sCampaign,TheLayof Igor’sCampaign,TheLayof theHostof Igor, andTheLayof theWarfareWagedbyIgor.ThepoemgivesanaccountofafailedraidofIgorSvyatoslavich(d.1202)againstthePolovtsiansoftheDonRiverregion.Whilesomehavedisputedtheauthenticityof thepoem, the current scholarly consensus is that thepoem is authenticanddatestothemedievalperiod(late12thcentury)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_Igor%27s_Campaign.


According to the 2011 Study of High NetWorth Women’s Philan‐thropy and The Impact of Women’s Giving Networks, the most im‐portant reasons are as follows: women understand how their gift canmake a difference; theywant to support an efficient organization, andhave a desire to give back to the community. The least important rea‐sonsarethefollowing:tofurtherbusinessinterests,tohonorthelegacyofothers,simplybecausetheywereasked(seeFigure3).

Figure3.

Thus,women’sactivisminfluencesglobaltrendtowardthecreationanddevelopmentoforganizationsthatareestablishedbyandforwom‐en.Forexample,theWomenofColorFundraisingInstituteoffersatrain‐ingprogramforwomeninnonprofitorganizations.Thisprogramteach‐es them how to write grants, solicit funds, plan special events, andorganizeabudget.TheWomen’sPhilanthropyInstitutemissionistohelpwomengainconfidenceasdonors.Theyprovidestatisticsandtrendsonwomenandphilanthropy,aswellasmotivatewomentobecomeleadersand philanthropists. TheWomen of InheritedWealth program teachesabout responsible investing, developing charitable interests, and sup‐ports women with inherent wealth on making personal philanthropicdecisions. TheW.K.Kellogg Foundation promotes philanthropy by im‐plementingstrategies to link thepursuitsand issuesofwomen’s funds

Moved by How Gift Can Makea Difference (81.7%)

Giving to an Organization that isEfficient (80.5%)

Give Back to Community (78.2%)

Feel Financially Secure (77.1%)

Being Asked (36.9%)

Further Legacy of Others (33.1%)

Business Interests (7.5%)

0 20 40 60 80 100

AFFLUENT WOMEN: WHY THEY GIVE

126 ALLA KRASULIA

withmainstreamphilanthropicactivities(Richardson,2000,p.11).Butit’snotjustwhogivesthatischanging—thereis,afterall,arichhistoryof high‐profile women contributing generously to significant causes—butit’showtheyaregivingandtowhomthatisredefiningcontemporaryphilanthropy. Private foundations and public charities dedicated tofundraisingbyandforwomenhavegrownatafasterratethangivingbytheoverall foundation community.A report conductedby theFounda‐tionCenterandWomen’sFundingNetworkfoundthatfrom2004‐2006,giving by women’s funds’ grew 24%, while foundation giving overallgrewby14.8%.Thesesamewomen’sfundssawdouble‐digitfundraisinggainsduringthisperiod;in2006,theyraised$101million,upfrom$72millionin2004(Forbes,2009).Globalwomen’sorganizationsbegantoflourish in 2005. However, their budgets are still relatively small. Themajordonorstotheseorganizationstendtobeindividuals.Newsourcesof gender related issues funding emerge because women’s issues arewidelydiscussedandprofessionallycoveredinmediaaroundtheworld;thustheyattractattentiontotheseissuesandpromotecharitableinitia‐tivestosolvethem.Themajorityofinternationaldonorsareconvincedthatalotofsocialproblemscanbesolvedbyinvestinginwomen.Nor‐way, Sweden, Spain, the Netherlands have government funding pro‐gramsforwomen’sfunds.Unfortunately,noUkrainianwomen’sorgani‐zationshavereceivedfinancialaidfromthegovernment.

These trends do not leave researchers, experts, or women them‐selves indifferent. Organizations that focus their activities particularlyonissuesofwomen’sphilanthropyhavebeenactivelycreatedsincethelate20thcenturyintheUSAandWesternEurope.Thus,innearlyeverystate in the U.S. there are research centers on women’s philanthropy,women philanthropist associations, and women’s philanthropy insti‐tutesatuniversitiesthatencouragestudentstodoresearchonthistopic.Avarietyofliteraturehasbeenpublished:frompopularscientificgenresthat describe the peculiarities of women’s philanthropy; and researchthat analyses trends in this regard; to methodological ones that givepracticalrecommendationsandteachhowtoworkwithfemaledonors.

Anotherargumentforthedelineationofwomen’sphilanthropyintoa separate field does not sound very encouraging formen. Aswomenoutlive men an average of 5.2 years, there are predictions that in 50years $41 trillion will change hands from one generation to the next,with 70% of this amount being controlled by women. The fact thatwomen have a greater life expectancy and, in most cases, inherit the


familyproperty(dependingontheculturalandlegalcontext)givesrea‐son to believe that substantial philanthropic decisions are andwill betakenbywomen.Moreover,nowadayswomendonotonlyadvisemen.Theyare themembersofgoverningbodiesofcharitiesor theheadsoforganizationsledbytheirhusbands.Womendonotjustsignthecheque,but immerse themselves in the problems addressed by organizations,and,monitortheperformanceofapprovedprojects.Womenarereadytosupportefforts toaddressmorecomplexproblemsthatwilleventuallyleadtogreatresults.Theyareopentosuggestions,andstudypreviousexperience in order to avoid mistakes. Understanding the motives ofwomenengagementinphilanthropyhasmanypracticalimplicationsforuniversities.Tocitejustoneexample,womenoftenhaveagreaterinflu‐ence on decision‐making regarding family financial expenses, and par‐ticularlythosehavingtodowithcharitableexpenditures(Kamas,Pres‐ton&Baum,2008,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.42).

Womenhavebeenpartof theUSphilanthropy inhighereducationsince its inception. At first they gave handmade candles, blankets, andother items, and gradually founded women’s colleges after their longexclusion fromhigher education. Over the past few decades, the pres‐ence of women in the philanthropic field has significantly increased(Shaw‐HardyandTaylor,2010,quotedafter:Drezner,2011]).Consider‐ingtheincreasingeconomicpowerofwomen,althoughitisappropriatetonote thatagendergap in incomesstillexists,wemayconclude thatwomen can be influential philanthropists or manage foundations andnon‐profitorganizations justaswellasmen(Gasman,2011,quotedaf‐ter: Drezner, 2011). However, research onwomen’s monetary philan‐thropyinU.S.highereducationdoesnotrevealthissubjecttothefullestextent(Drezner,2011,p.42).

Analysis of philanthropy in amore general levelmaybeuseful forunderstandingwomen’sphilanthropyinhighereducation.AccordingtoCapek(quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.42),women,aswellaspeopleofdifferent colors, are not inclined to charity and are less generous thanmen.Buttakingintoaccountsuchvariablesasage,health,income,num‐ber of children and dependents, Capek concluded that the differencesbetweenmaleandfemalephilanthropistsareinsignificant.

One factor thatmakesourunderstandingofwomen’sphilanthropymorecomplicatedisthedifficultyassociatedwithfiguringouthowmuchandhowoftenwomendonatetocharity.Inthesourcesoneconomicstheresearch results of genders charity levels are diverse (Bekkers and

128 ALLA KRASULIA

Wiepking,2007;CoxandDeck,2006;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.42).Someresearchersbelievethatwomenaremoregenerousthanmen,andmakelargerdonations(Andreoni,Brown,1998andRischall,2003;Bek‐kers,2004;Carman,2006;CrosonandBuchan,1999;EckelandGross‐man, 1998, 2001, 2003; Eckel, Grossman, and Johnston, 2005; Kamas,Preston,andBaum,2008;Mesch,Rooney,Steinberg,andDenton,2006;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.42),othersdonotfindsignificantdiffer‐ences (Bolton and Katok, 1995; Frey and Meier, 2004; quoted after:Drezner,2011,p.42);buttherearealsoscholarswhocharacterizedif‐ferences incharitablebehaviorsbetweenmenandwomen,consideringmen to be more generous (Brown‐Kruse & Hummels, 1993; Chang,2005; Frey & Meier, 2004; Jackson & Latanè, 1981; Meier, 2007;Sokolowski,1996;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.42).Accordingtooth‐er sources,women aremoreprone to charity thanmen, but the lattermakelargercontributions(Andreoni,Brown&Rischall,2003;Bekkers,2004; Belfield & Beney, 2000; Einhof, 2006; Lyons & Nivison‐Smith,2006;Mesch,Rooney,Steinberg,&Denton,2006;Piper&Schnepf,2008;Weyant, 1984; quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 42). This phenomenoncouldbeexplainedby thegap in incomeofwomenandmen(Drezner,2011,p.42).OneofthestatementsfromAdamSmith’sTheoryofMoralSentimentscouldbeaproofinsupportoftheideaexpressedabove—

The propriety of generosity and public spirit is founded upon the sameprinciplewith thatof justice.Generosity isdifferent fromhumanity.Thosetwoqualities,whichatfirstsightseemsonearlyallied,donotalwaysbelongtothesameperson.Humanityisthevirtueofawoman,generosityofaman.The fair sex,who have commonlymuchmore tenderness than ours, haveseldom somuch generosity. Thatwomen rarelymake considerable dona‐tionsisanobservationofthecivillaw(Smith,2005,p.171).

Analysisoftheliteratureonsociologyandsocialpsychologyallowsustooutlinemotivedifferencesinprosocialbehavior,includingvolunteer‐ismandmonetaryphilanthropy. Somescientists believe that gender isa variable value, which affects the amount of donations and contribu‐tions,compassionandaltruisticbehavior.Hoffman(1977,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)arguesthatempathyismoreinherentforwomenthanmen,and thatwomenaremore likely to feelguilty forsocial ine‐quality, and therefore demonstrate greater prosocial behavior. PiliavinandCharng(1990,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)findwomentobemore inclinedtocharity thanmen.Otherspointout thatgenderdiffer‐


encesarerelatedtoreligiousandculturalbeliefsandcommitments(Jha,Yadav&Kuman,1997,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44).Capek(2001,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.43)arguesthat“fewsourcesofreliabledata accurately document patterns of women’s donating behavior oraccount for giving differences betweenwomen andmen”. HodgkinsonandWeitzman (1996, quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 44) reported onabiannualmeetingoftheIndependentSector“GivingandVolunteering”andprovedthatmarriedwomenmakesmallercontributionsthantheirhusbands.However,BostonCollege’s SocialWelfareResearch Institutefound the opposite, that women are more prone to charity than men(Schervish,1997,quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.43).

Moststudiesshowthatwomenareinvolvedinvolunteeringsignifi‐cantlymorethanmen(Einolf,2006;Hodgkinson,Weitzman,Noga,andGorski,1992;Hodgkinson&Weitzman,1996;Mesch,Rooney,Steinberg,and Denton, 2006; Sokolowski, 1996; Musick &Wilson, 2007; quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44).Somestudiesshowpositiveandsignificantrelationship between charity and volunteering (Brown & Lankford,1992; Parsons, 2004; quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 44). In addition,Parsons (2004, quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 44) found that femalevolunteersaremore likely toprovide financialsupport to thesameor‐ganization where they provide volunteer services. Parsons concludedthatvolunteeringhelpswomenfeelconnectedtotheorganization.Thisfindingisimportantforuniversities,becausetheyhavetoinvolvealum‐ni and other potential donors by means of volunteer opportunities(Drezner,2011,p.43).

Intermsofthesubjectofthispaper,itisimportanttoanalyzethere‐search done in the field of giving decisions among couples. Andreoni,Brown,andRischal(2003;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)foundthatamongheterosexualmarriedcoupleswitha jointhousehold,menweremorelikelytomakedecisionsregardingcharitablecontributions.Educa‐tion and income were more significant determinants than gender. Aninteresting fact was that, when donation decisionmaking belonged towomen, the educational institutions, such as their alma mater, oftenreceived donations. Rooney, Brown and Mesch (2007; quoted after:Tempel, Seiler&Aldrich,2011,pp.165‐166) studied the interrelation‐shipofgenderandphilanthropyineducation.Theresultsoftheirstudycoincide with those obtained by Andreoni, Brown, and Rischal (2003;quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 44). Subsequently, they proved thatwhenwomenmakeadecision, theamountof themonetaryandvolun‐

130 ALLA KRASULIA

tary contributions to education increases. These results are also im‐portant for fundraisers in higher education, because they should takeinto account these peculiarities while working with heterosexual cou‐ples.Forexample,itwouldbeappropriateandbeneficialtosolicitauni‐versitygraduatewife,evenifsheisanalumnaofanotherschool(Drez‐ner,2011,p.44).

Over the past fewdecadesUSwealth has been consolidated in thehands of an ever‐shrinking group of people. Today almost 85%of thenation’s capital is ownedby approximately the top20%ofAmericans.However, formanyof thesewealthyAmericanscharity isbecoming in‐creasinglyimportant.Liketherichofthepast“goldenage,”suchasCor‐nelius Vanderbilt and Andrew Carnegie, who were unprecedentedlygenerous, intoday’s“goldenage”America’swealthiestcitizensalsodo‐natestaggeringsumstocharity.However,today’sphilanthropistsdonotsimplysignacheckforcharityandforgetaboutit.Allofthem,fromBillGatestoPhilipBerber,takeanactiveroleinthedistributionanduseoftheirdonations.

DailyFinance website explains how American billionaires are en‐gagedincharity.In2000,whenPhilipBerbersoldhiscompany,CyBer‐Corp,toCharlesSchwab(SCHW)for$488million,theIrish‐bornphilan‐thropist and hiswife set aside $100million to fund their own charity“A Glimmer of Hope.” Taskedwith “liftingwomen and children out ofextremepovertyinruralEthiopia,thegrouphasbuiltalmost200healthclinics,dug thousandsofwells, fundedhundredsofeducationprojects,and has extended millions of dollars in microloans” (Daily Finance,2011).

Once the first technology magnate in the United States, today BillGates is a major philanthropist of the country. The co‐founder of Mi‐crosoftandhiswifeMelindahaveallocatedhalfoftheir$54‐billionfor‐tunetotheGatesFoundation,whichaimsatfightingpovertyaroundtheworld and funding educational projects in the United States. In manyways, this charitable fund follows the business model of Microsoft, itbeingbasedonGates’beliefinthetransformativepoweroftechnology.ItisextremelybeneficialfortheFundthatGatesispersonallyengagedinit.In2006hesteppeddownfromhispositionatMicrosofttobeinvolvedinphilanthropyfull‐time.TheGatesFoundationhasbecomethelargestandoneofthemosttransparentcharitiesintheworld;thanks,inpart,toa famous investor,WarrenBuffett,whoallocated$37billion to its fur‐ther development in 2006. As the investor admitted, he followed the


mainprincipleofhisowninvestingstrategy:findinggoodorganizationswith talented managers and backing them. His company, Berkshire‐Hathaway (BRK.A) is involved in themanagement of all assets that itbuys,andBuffettparticipatesactively intheactivitiesandisamemberof itsboardoftrustees.Inaddition,BillandMelindaGatesandWarrenBuffettlaunchedtheGivingPledgein2010inanefforttogetAmerica’swealthiestfamiliestogiveawaytheirsurpluswealthtobettertheworld.Theinitiativewassuccessful.Thefoundationhasreceivedpledgesfrom59U.S. richest tycoons, including George Lucas, David Rockefeller andTed Turner. Threemembers of this year’s new pledge class—QuickenloanfounderDanGilbertandhiswifeJennifer,RelatedGroupco‐founderJorgeandhiswifeDarlene,andLeonardandClaireTow—attendedtheForbes400SummitonPhilanthropy,agatheringheldinNewYorkthispast June(Forbes,2012).UponanalyzingTheGivingPledge listofcur‐rent pledgerswe conclude that theworld’swealthiest individuals andcouples have made a commitment to dedicate the majority of theirwealthtophilanthropy(TheGivingPledge).

Onemorepointtobediscussedisorganizationalchoice.Women,aswellastherepresentativesofcommunitiesofcolour,tendtomakedona‐tionsandhelpthoseorganizationsthathadanimpactonthemorsome‐one close to them (Burgoyne, Young & Walker, 2005; Parsons, 2004;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44).Andreoni,Brown,andRischal(2003;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)foundthatmenfocustheirattentiononasmallnumberofnon‐profitorganizations,whilewomenaremorelikely to distribute their charitable assistance betweenmore than oneorganization. In addition, Einolf (2006; quoted after: Drezner, 2011,p.44)andRooney,andMesch(2007;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)consider that women, unlike men prefer charitable activities for thebenefitofeducational institutionsandorganizations.Otherresearchers(Okunade,Wunnava &Walsh, 1994;Wunnava & Lauze, 2001; quotedafter: Drezner, 2011, p. 44) did not find any statistical difference be‐tweenmenandwomenwhen it concernedalumnigiving.According toWunnavaandLauze(2001;quotedafter:Drezner,2011,p.44)womenaremoreconsistentandregularintheircharitableactivities,whilemengivemoresignificantphilanthropicsupporttotertiaryeducation(Okun‐ade, 1996; quoted after: Drezner, 2011, p. 44), although not regularly(Drezner,2011,p.44).Thus,philanthropicbehavioursdifferbygender.Women,generally,aresocializeddifferently,havedifferentcommunica‐tionstyles,andhavedifferentphilanthropicmotivations.Men,forexam‐

132 ALLA KRASULIA

ple, tendtowanttomaketheircommunityabetterplacebyprovidingserviceswheregovernmentcanʼtorwonʼt.Women,bycomparison,tendto identify with certain causes and help individuals meet their basicneeds (Moline, 2010). Moreover, women have different attitudes to‐wards wealth, money, and philanthropy based on their generationalexperiences(Guardianshipvs.Ownership)asfollows:

Greatest Generation – born before 1925 (currently 85+): “Not mymoney”(collectivists).

SilentGeneration – born 1926–1945 (currently 65–84): Passionateforcause.

BabyBoomers – born1945–1964 (currently46–65):Women’smo‐vement.

Generation X – born 1964–1980 (currently 30–46): Inherited andearned/independentandempowered.

Millennials – born 1980–2000 (currently < 30): Confident, open tochange(Moline,2010;Sargeant&Shang,2010,pp.545–547).

Followingthelogicofourresearch,fromthestandpointofagenderapproach we perceive that a woman‐philanthropist, with her psycho‐physiological differences, mental and emotional constitution, spiritualand volitional peculiarities, value and ideological orientations such associo‐culturalgender,carriesthemaingeneticcodeofsocietytosustainsurvival,procreation,andprotectchildren,theelderly,thesick,andtheneedy.Suchaperception,andthescientificunderstandingoftheimageofwoman,determineshertobeanactivesubjectofphilanthropyinedu‐cation,thesphereofsocialpractice,whichintermsofthegenderdimen‐sionweinterpretas:(1)anexpressionofnaturalandacquiredhumanequalitiesandvirtues;(2)anorganicpartoftotalcharitablepracticesineducation; (3) an integral part of national and cultural revival of thestate,theformationofethicalandspiritualvaluesofnation;(4)afactorofsocialadaptationofwomaninsociety;(5)asteptowardsunderstand‐ingherroleinsociety,self‐knowledge,self‐realizationofherpersonality,enhancing her social status and authority; (6) a transition link in thechainofchangesingenderstratificationofsociety,gradualreorientationoftheroleofwomanfroma“passiveobserver”toan“activeparticipant”of public life; (7) an indicator of social progress, the level of develop‐ment of democratic, egalitarian relations in society (Ільченко, 2012a,pp.116–123).Consequently, gendermatters inphilanthropy.Researchsuggests that women’s philanthropic interests and habits differ frommen’s because women approach philanthropy with different motiva‐


tions and goals. Fundraisers cannot assume that what works well formen will work well for women, too (Tempel, Seiler & Aldrich, 2011,pp.162–171),soeffortsneedtobemadetosolicitandcultivatefemaleprospects. Thus, the fundraising strategies and tactics that will workbetterforwomen,asopposedtomenareasfollows:firstly,fundraisersshouldbemindfulofdifferentmarketingandcommunicationstyles,andwomen’sattitudetowardmoney;secondly,theyshouldintegrategenderandgenerationaldifferences,maritalstatusandfamilyfactors,raceandcultureintofundraisingstrategies;thirdly,women’sinternalandexter‐nalbarrierstogivingshouldbetakenintoaccount;andeventually,fund‐raisersshouldconsidertheirinstitutionalreadinessforwomen’sphilan‐thropy.Aswemovefurtherintothe21thcentury, it is likelythatmorewomenwillbecomeactiveinphilanthropy.

Conclusion

Literarysourcesonwomenandphilanthropyarefarfromarrivingatdefinite,clearconclusions.Manyresearchstudiesonthepeculiaritiesofwomen’sphilanthropycontradictoneother,andtheydonotfullyreflecthowoftenwomenengageincharitablepractices,whatamountofmon‐ey, time, energy they contribute, and what their motives are. In fact,there isnodoubt thatwomenareverygenerous,humaneand inclinedtowardphilanthropy.Their ability tobedirectly involved in charitableactivitiesstrenthenswiththegrowthoftheireconomicpowerinsociety.As women around the globe have increasing access to education andincome, they can and do become a more powerful voice for change.Analysisandunderstandingoftheresearchdata,eventhoughmuchofitisstillambiguous,willmotivateuniversitiestobetterconsiderthewaysinwhichtheycanappealtoalumnifortheirphilanthropy,andtomakemore rational choices in the communication strategies they employ tosolicitthem.Womenareincreasinglyinvolvedintheuniversitycommu‐nity at all levels of academic, administrative, and development life. Asuniversities strive to securemuch needed financial resources for aca‐demics,research,scholarships,communityengagement,andmore,theymust create awelcomingand inclusiveenvironment to engagewomendonorsinuniversitylife.

Thus, taking into account the progressive prognostic potential ofwomen’sphilanthropy, given the role theyplay in theUSA,webelieve

134 ALLA KRASULIA

that intoday’sconditionsasUkrainemovestowardstandards intermsofhighereducationalarea,andphilanthropy,includingwomen’scharity,a civic, socio‐economic and professionally organized function (alongwithgovernmentsupportprograms).Furthermore,philanthropywithinthenationalhighereducationinUkraineisinterpretedbyusasagenet‐ically“innate”featureoftheUkrainianpeople,whichdefinesitsspiritualand intellectual background, and eventually reflects a distinctive posi‐tion of the Ukrainian nation among others. In the system of nationalhighereducationandtheculturalcommunity,women’sphilanthropyisoneoftheconsolidatingfactorsfortheestablishmentanddevelopmentofademocratic,civil,andcivilizedsociety.Womenalreadyprovidenewideas, new visions, new perspectives, and new resources to transformsociety,andwilldosoatanincreasingrateasUkrainiansocietycontin‐uestodevelop.

REFERENCES

BARCLAY’SWEALTHSTUDY.(2009)Tomorrow’sPhilanthropist.July2009.Women’sPhilanthropyInstituteattheCenteronPhilanthropyatIndianaUniversity.

CALLAMARD,A.(1999)AMethodologyforGender‐sensitiveResearch.Quebec:CentreforHumanRightsandDemocraticDevelopment,AmnestyInternationalPublica‐tions.

DAILY FINANCE. (2011)TheNewAge ofPhilanthropy:HowBillionairesAreGivingBack,March,26th,2011[Onlineresource].Availablefrom:http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/03/26/new‐age‐of‐philanthropy‐how‐billionaires‐are‐giving‐back/[Accessed:5thOctober2014].

DREZNER,N.D.(2011)PhilanthropyandFundraisinginAmericanHigherEducation.ASHEHigherEducationReport.37,2.

FORBES.(2009)WomenInPhilanthropy,August18,2009[Onlineresource].Availa‐ble from: http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/18/brill‐women‐philanthropy‐intelligent‐investing‐wealth.html[Accessed:3rdNovember2014].

FORBES. (2012)Meet theEight Forbes 400BillionairesWho Just Signed theGivingPledge,September,18,2012[Onlineresource].Availablefrom:http://www.forbes.com/sites/erincarlyle/2012/09/18/forbes‐400‐billionaires‐whove‐signed‐the‐giving‐pledge/[Accessed:25thOctober2014].

THE GIVING PLEDGE. (n.d.) Pledger Profiles [Online resource]. Available from:http://givingpledge.org/[Accessed:25thOctober2014].

GIVINGUSA.(2014)Indianapolis,IN:GivingUSAFoundation.ІЛЬЧЕНКО, О. (2012a) Передумови формування благодійної діяльності жінок

восвітіУкраїни(XVII–70‐ірр.XVIII ст.). In: Ільченко,O.Збірникнауковихпраць Полтавського держ. педагогічного університету ім. В.Г.Короленка:Педагогічнінауки.№55.pp.116‐123.


ІЛЬЧЕНКО, О. (2012b) Рушійні сили розвитку благодійної діяльності жіноквосвітнійгалузіУкраїни (XVII–70‐ірр.XVIII ст.). In: Ільченко,O.ЗбірникнауковихпрацьПолтавськогодерж.педагогічногоуніверситетуім.В.Г.Коро‐ленка:Педагогічнінауки.10.Вип.3(56).pp.89–95.

КОРРЕСПОНДЕНТ (2011) Корреспондент составил ТОП‐10 украинских филан‐тропов.№49.16декабря.[Onlineresource].Availablefrom:http://korrespondent.net/business/financial/1295148‐korrespondent‐sostavil‐top‐10‐ukrainskih‐filantropov[Accessed:13thSeptember2014].

KROTZ,A.(2009)ChronicleofPhilanthropy.June4.LEDUC,B.(2009)GuidelinesforGenderSensitiveResearch.November.ICIMOD.MOLINE,P.(2010)CASE,GenderMatters.ПОЛОНСЬКА‐ВАСИЛЕНКО,Н.(1965)ВидатніжінкиУкраїни.Вінніпег.RICHARDSON,W.C.(2000)Women’sPhilanthropy.BattleCreek,Michigan:W.K.Kel‐

loggFoundation.SARGEANT,A.&SHANG,J.(2010)FundraisingPrinciplesandPractice.Jossey‐Bass.SMITH, A. (2005) The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Edited by Sálvio M. Soares.

MetaLibri.TEMPEL,E.R.,SEILER,T.L.&ALDRICH,E.E. (2011)AchievingExcellence inFund‐

raising.3rded.Jossey‐Bass.WALTON, A. (2005)Women and Philanthropy in Education. Bloomington: Indiana

UniversityPress.WOMEN’S PHILANTHROPY INSTITUTE. (2009)Women’s Philanthropy on Campus:

AHandbookforWorkingwithWomenDonors.Women’sPhilanthropyInstituteatthe Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. December 2010. [Online].Available from: http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/files/file/womens_philanthropy_on_campus_2.pdf[Accessed:14thNovember20014].

WORLDGIVINGINDEX(2012)AGlobalViewofGivingTrends.CharitiesAidFounda‐tion. December 2012. Available from: http://www.cafonline.org/PDF/WorldGivingIndex2012WEB.pdf[Accessed:14thNovember2014].

136 ALLA KRASULIA

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

AnetaJudzińskaAdam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

Womanhood—contemporary paradoxes of equality and exclusion

ABSTRACT. The article analyses currently emerging patterns of womanhood in the socio‐cultural context. The author, using the feminist discourse, attempts to answer the followingquestions:What positive changes (based on the idea of gender equality) had taken place intermsofhowthepatternofwomanhoodisculturallyconstructed?Aretherestillsuchareasinthe contemporarymodel ofwoman’s life,whereweobserve certain formsof discrimination,basedonastereotypicalattitude(inboth:biologicalandculturalsense)towardsgenderissues?Theauthor,byadoptingthegenderperspective,analysesfundamentalareasinwomen’slives:professional career and private life, to verify the level of their social (re)construction. Herreflectionisalsoenrichedwithponderingsabouttheplaceofwomanhoodinpopularculture.Through references to numerous research findings taken from the professional literature(mostly Polish), she tries to demonstrate that there are two opposing forces that influencewomanhood:thefirstonebasesonthemechanismofstereotypingandgenderdiscrimination(determinedbytheessentialisticperspective)andthesecondonepromotesequalitydiscourse(determinedbytheperspectiveofsocialconstructivism).Inconclusion,theauthormakestheassumption, that contemporary patterns of womanhood balance on the line between twoworlds,inwhichdeeplyrootedtradition(conditionedbythebiologicaldeterminism)coexistswithmodernegalitarianism.Thespecificdiscrepancybetweenouterandinner(self)perceptionof the social and professional roles women play causesmany dilemmas and forces them tomakedifficultdecisionsinlife.

KEYWORDS: feminism, exclusion, women’s careers, women’s emotional life, womanhood inpop‐culture

“[Our society] assigns different roles to the two sexes, surroundsthemfrombirthwithanexpectationofdifferentbehaviour,playsoutthewholedramaofcourtship,marriage,andparenthoodintermsoftypesofbehaviourbelievedtobeinnateandthereforeappropriateforonesexorfortheother.Weknowdimlythattheseroleshavechangedevenwithinourhistory”(Mead,2001,p.23).IfweweretobelieveMargaretMead’swords, the concept ofwomanhood (masculinity) is a flexible category,undergoingconstant(de)construction.Driftingthroughtimeandspace,it becomesmore andmore fluid and inconsistent,which certainlyhin‐

138 ANETA JUDZIŃSKA

ders the process of giving it a particular form or shape. Socio‐culturalstandards, changing in every age, determine new, often contradictory,modelsof“thenewwoman”.Throughthereferencetothegendersche‐ma theory by SandraBem, Iwould like to present currently emergingpatternsofwomanhood,whichare,as Iassume, theresultof theearlysocializationofgirlsandboys(Lipsitz‐Bem,2000,p.129),whosedevel‐oping identity becomes a “creation of an individual aswell as culture”(Lipsitz‐Bem,2000,p.145).Thesubjectofmyanalysistacklestwofun‐damentalfieldsinwomen’slife:theprivateandprofessionalsphere.Myreflectionisalsoenrichedwiththeculturalaspect,dealingwiththeroleof womanhood in popular culture. As I take into account the feministdiscourse,beginningwiththe1stwaveoffeminism,Itrytoanswerthefollowingquestions:Whatpositive changeshad takenplacewithin thecultural constructionof themodelofwomanhood?Are there still suchaspectsof“modern”woman’slife,wherewecanobservesignsofadis‐criminatingoutlook(bothbiologicalandcultural)onthegenderissue?

The official battle for equal rights: first, second and third wave of feminism

First‐wavefeminism,beganinthedeclineof18thcentury(endedinthe fifties‐sixties, 20th century), supportedwith the idea of liberalismrootedintheEnlightenment(Zamojska,2000,p.1),wasnamedthelib‐eralfeminism(Tong,2002,p.26).“Forthefirsttimeinhistory,feministsof the Enlightenment formulated a theory which liberated them fromconstrainsof«unfairtradition»viaequality,enablingwomenasagroupto «self‐authorize» themselves to emancipation”. On one hand, then,liberal feminism was based on a notion, that every human being, asa rational entity, “having the same reason and freewill” (Bator, 2001,p. 32)—regardless of their sex—has equal rights in terms of access topublic life, and the pathway to liberation leads through education.Thoughfromtheotherhand,thesuccessofemancipationdependedonthe fact, that women achieved “male standards” (Tong, 2002, p. 24).Therefore,wemustemphasize, that the ideologicalquintessenceof thefirst‐wavefeminists’pursuitsfocusedonthewomen’ssocialstatusandtheirparticipationinpubliclife,whileturningablindeyetoprivatelifeissues(marriageandfamilyrelations).

Womanhood—contemporary paradoxes of equality and exclusion 139

Subsequently, the “postwar” second‐wave feminism (beginning inthesixties,20thcentury),sometimescalledthe“feminismofnewdiffer‐ence” (Bator,2001,p.49),emerged in response to thedisappointmentwith results of the emancipation activity in the 19th century (Ślęczka,1999,p.31).

Thesecond‐wavefeminismwasbasedonaconviction,thattheprob‐lemofasymmetryisrootedmoredeeplyinthesocialstructureandthatthe fundamental form of reproducing gender inequality is the culturefactor.Themainsubjectofdeliberationwasthequestionofwomanhoodatlarge,theconceptofemancipationandsexualdifference(approachedinvariousways)(Zamojska,2010,pp.74–74). “Modern feminismàre‐bours”,approvingofessentialistperspective,headedtowardssolvingtheproblem of inequality through glorifying womanhood identified withnature,whilesimultaneouslydegradingthe“culture‐infected”masculini‐ty. In the innovativecultural feminism,however, “thesexualdifferencestarted to be understood as a sex/gender distinction” (Bator, 2001,p.56).Althoughsex,regulatedbybiology,remainedunchangeable,gen‐der, determined with socio‐cultural repressions, went through manytransformations(Bator,2001,p.57).“Thecategoryofgenderdifference”becamethekeywordofthesecond‐wavefeminismandofferedachanceto liberatefrom“fallogocentric”reality,(unsuccessfulduetothemove‐ment’sinternaldivision)(Bator,2001,p.48).

Formedintheendof20thcentury,thethird‐wavefeminismturnedtowardsuniversalvalues, inwhich theconceptofgenderbecamerela‐tive(Tong,2002,p.58).AccordingtoEvaZamojska,itsfollowerspostu‐lated“theadvancedindividualizationincreatingeachperson’sidentity,maleorfemale,andrejecting(throughdeconstruction)anydetermined(biologically,metaphysically, socially, culturally, ideologically) feminityormasculinity”(Zamojska,2000,p.7).

Whenanalyzingcontemporarytheorieslinkedwithconstruingfem‐inity‐masculinity,weobservea specificdiscrepancy,whichbeganwiththe first‐wave feminism, between biology and culture, tradition andchangeability. Undoubtedly, emancipation movements and raisingself‐awarenessamongwomenhascausedsignificantchangesinshapinganewpatternofwomanhood:themodelofan“activewoman,”manifest‐ing itself in the need for independence: wide access to educationand conscious career planning—something that the 19th century’sfeminists could only dream about—became a reality today (Bartosz,2011,p.263).


Womanhood and social stratification on the labour market

Ifwesearchfornewpatternsofwomanhoodinprofessionallife,weobserve, that the affirmation of women’s gender identity usually doesnotleadtoconflictinworkplacewheretheproportionofwomenversusmeniscloseto1 : 1(similarnumberofmaleandfemaleworkers)or0 : 1(morewomenormostlywomen), in so called “female jobs” (Wiśniew‐ska‐Szałek&Wiśniewska, 2007, p. 168).Krystyna Janicka sayswe aredealingherewiththeclassicexampleofthehorizontallabourstratifica‐tion (Janicka, 1995, p. 95), which is, accor ding to Natalia Sarata “theresultofreferringtostereotypicalfemaleandmalecompetences”(Sara‐ta,2011,p.272).Awomantakesonaroleofservingotherpeople.Onlyshe is equipped with enough humility, readiness to sacrifice herself,compromisingherownbenefitstoservehighervalues.Sheisalsohelp‐ful and skillful in using indirect social influence strategies. (Mandal,2004, p. 231). Therefore, it is not surprising that in this perspectiveawoman’sprofessional lifemanifestsitself in“publicsectorandactivi‐ties in social infrastructure, that is caregiving, food supply, health andhygiene” (Janicka, 1995, p. 95). This is when the ideal of womanhoodturnsaroundstereotypicalconcepts,permeatedbybiologicaldetermin‐ism,tellingastoryaboutcaring,empathicandsubmissivefemalenature.(Reszke, 1991, p. 153). Such ideal, reflecting itself in a long‐standingcultural transmission, somehowimposesaconventionaldistributionofdutiesandreinforcesthe“valuesystemthat ischarcteristic for theEu‐ropean civilization”,wherewe find “clear patterns ofwomanhood andmanhood”(Janicka,1995,p.96).Theresultsofthereport“Women,Menand Working Conditions in Europe”, based on findings from the fifthEuropeanWorkingConditionsSurvey(EWCS),conductedin2010,over78%ofthepopulationworkingasgeneralclerks,personalcareworkers,healthassociateprofessionals,andcleanersarewomen.Itturnsout,thatalso in Poland “76% of intermediate level administrative clerks, officeworkers, retail and service workers, with dominance of physical, un‐skilledlabour,andineducation—97%ofschoolpedagogues,90%oftheprimary school teachers and70%ofhigh school teachers arewomen”(Sarata,2011,p.276).AsSuzaneMaddockputsit,femalejobsaresocial‐lyperceivedasunattractive,becausetheyrepresentlowwages,“inferi‐ority”of theworkroleand limitedpromotionopportunities(Maddock,2003,p.81).Thistypeofgenderstereotypingisdescribedintheprofes‐


sionalliteratureasa“stickyfloor”phenomenon(Brannon,2002,p.404).On the basis of such concept, as Joan Acker puts it, lays the notion ofwomen’slowstatusonthelabourmarket,whichinpracticemeansmaledomination on executive posts (Acker, 1990, pp. 139–140). Empiricaldata shows, that the phenomenon of “female grouping” on particularlabourmarket segments is still present, mainly because of the educa‐tionalchoicesyoungwomenmake. It turnsout that themajorityof fe‐male students graduate either in humanities or medicine. (Smithetal.,2013).Analyzingprofessionalsituationofwomenwhointernalizethis model caused me to conclude, that they are prone to experienceadiscrepancybetweentheexternalandinternal(self)perceptionoftherole they takeon.Byplaying the rolewhichmeets social expectations,they gain approval—or rather avoid disapproval—from their environ‐ment,yettheymaybestrugglingwiththeinnersenseof“underestima‐tion” and gender discrimination. I define such model as the “FaithfulTraditionalist”.

Situation changes dramatically, when womanhood trespasses onmaleterritory.Ifawomantakesonajobwhichislargelydominatedbymen, i.e. of a manager or a lawyer, it certainly “switches on” anothermechanismofgender inequalityatwork—theverticalsegregation.The“glass ceiling” phenomenon reflects accurately in the Polish GeneralSocialSurvey investigation,citedbyHenrykDomański,about theplaceofwomeninthehierarchyofmanagerialposts(generalmanagers,lowermanagers,non‐managers). Itturnsoutthat inthirteenyears, i.e.1992–2005, “the shape of the job position ladder” is relatively solid and re‐sembles a pyramid, on the bottom of which there are women non‐managers. Such disproportion remained unchanged “also when welooked at the level of education, work experience, the size of place ofresidenceanda fewmorevariables” (Domański,2011,p.265).Similarresults on the social stratificationphenomenon in theworkplacewerepresentedbyErikOlinWrightandJaneenBaxtertheyshowedthatpro‐portion of women (against men) on higher management positionsequals 1 : 2 (Wright & Baxter, 2000, pp. 277–278). What action thenshouldbetakenbywomen,whomanagedtoploughthroughthe“thicketofcorporatejungle”andstandonthetopofandrocentricpower?Whatdifficultiesdidtheyovercome—andstillmust—tomaintainstatusquo?ReferringtothethoughtofAgnieszkaGromkowska‐Melosik, it isworthtoassert,that“awoman,whoholdsapositionofpoweroverpeopleandinvolves decisionmaking, is somehow entrapped within contradicting


socialexpectances”(Gromkowska‐Melosik,2012,p.79).Ifshewantstoachieve and then keep a high job position, she has to resign from themajorityofattributes,commonly identifiedaswomanly(Gromkowska‐Melosik, 2012, pp. 82–83), and adopts a male identity. “Equipped” ina package of psychic resources, such as: professionalism, endurance,logic,leadershipskills(wellrootedincultureandpassedonviasociali‐zation, as typically male traits), she demonstrates them while usingstandardsof theopposite sex in creatingherexternal image.Thenshefulfills criteria of big corporations,which allowpromotion and furthercareerdevelopment(Brannon,2002,p.399).Ononehand,battlingwith“the stereotypical attitude towardsher gender (womanhood)” throughassimilationofmalepatterns increases the chanceofprofessional suc‐cess, buton theotherhand, it exposesher to “theaccusationof losingherfeminity”(Gromkowska‐Melosik,2012,p.79).Awomanwhotriestoneutralize this gender dissonance, sometimes manifesting itself asa psychological struggle, as Ilana Löwy puts it, chooses the option of“bilingualism.”Opposedtotheriskoflosingherwomanhood,sheselec‐tively (depending on a situation) “employs” male or female attributes(Löwy,2012,p.159).Thisperfectionism,throughwhichshetriestoex‐press her personality in every life sphere, reflects itself, according toBogusława Budrowska who cites Marjorie Hansen‐Shaevitz, in a “su‐perwoman syndrome.” The author explains, that is has its source in“a socialization message addressed to girls”, based on the patriarchalmodel.This ishowanadultwomanbecomesconvinced, thateachandeveryaction she takes shouldexemplifyherprofessionalism (Budrow‐ska, 2003, pp. 65–66). This balancing between traditional culturaltransmission (striving to be feminine) and inner affirmationof profes‐sional satisfaction (taking up male schemes) designates—as I think—new standards of widely understood pattern of womanhood: “TheWomanWarrior.”

Womanhood on matrimonial market: the need of self-fulfillment versus/and synchronous love

“Sheishappyandsatisfiedwithbeingsingle,whichmeansthatsheisnotafrustratedoldspinster,byallmeanssearchingforahusbandandlove”(Szlendak,2010,p.467)—thisfragmentisaboutawomanwhoisnotinvolvedinanintimate,relativelystablerelationship.InPolishsub‐


ject literature, an urban single, or—according to American research‐ers—asingleprofessionalwoman, isacontemporaryalternativeto thesocalledmodelof“livingalone.”Itdescribesanindependent,educatedwoman(Tymicki,2001,pp.77–105),whosurroundsherselfwithawebof support from her family and friends,while actively participating ina cultural and social life (Czernecka, 2012, pp. 139–140).According totheGUS[CentralStatisticalOfficeinPoland]surveyfrom2011,33,4%offemalepopulationbetween25and34yearofageweresingle(Nowaketal., 2012). The phenomenon of being singlewas also observed amongyoung Japanese women in their thirties, half of which (50%) in 2001identifiedthemselvesassingles,thusoutnumberingtheirpeersfromtheUnitedStates(37%)6(Berg‐Crossetal.,2004,p.40).TheresultsofBar‐baraWitehead’sanalyses,inthegroupofAmericansinglewomen,haveshown, that youngwomen’s life priorities had changed. They internal‐ized(asaconsequenceofupbringing)anew,non‐stereotypicalpatternforcreatingtheirfuture,onthebasisofwhichlaysself‐fulfillment.Pro‐fessionaleducationandgettingasatisfying jobthatallowsbeingfinan‐ciallyindependentbecamethemostimportantventureforyoungwom‐en, lasting usually until the 30th year of age. The lack of a partner—according to thisauthor—inmajoritydoesnot result fromaconsciousdecision of staying single, but is a side effect of realizing “thenew lifepattern” (Whitehead, 2003, p. 9), in which being well educated anda chance to live in cohabitation or having strictly sexual relationships(Whitehead,2003,p.10),causedthemtopostponethedecisiontomarry(Whitehead,2003,p.14).

Today’s singles—women with high self‐esteem, conscious of theircapabilities—expectmoreandmorefrommen,whichcertainlyprolongsthe time of finding an appropriate partner. In turn, as years go by,“women’s chancesof gettingmarrieddrop sharplywhen they get pasttheirthirtiesandalmosthittherockbottom,iftheygetpast35thyearofage”(Szlendak,2010,p.468).Hereweseeaclassicalparadox:ayoungwoman,absorbedwithpursuinghercareer,postponesfindingapartner,but when her financial and professional situation seem to stabilize(30–35yearofage),thenumberofpotentialcandidatesseverelydrops.The results of Beata Łaciak’s survey in the group of Polish schoolgirls

________________ 6“AccordingtoAmericanresearchdata,inthepast30yearsthenumberofmarried

women aged 24 increased from36% to 72%, and forwomen aged 30‐34, from6% to22%”(Slany,2002,pp.117–118).


andyoung,unmarriedwomenseemtoconfirmtheabovecorrelation.Itturnsout that in thehierarchyof schoolgirls’dreams(49%)aswellasadultwomen(45%),thefirstplacebelongstoeducationandgettinganinteresting job. A satisfying family life comes second—it is chosen by43%ofschoolgirlsand42%ofyoungunmarriedwomen(Łaciak,2002,p. 147, 167). Therefore, motives thatmakewomen stay single can beunderstood in the context of two coexistingopposites: free choice andconstraint.Aslongasthefirstoneresultsfromaconsciousresignationfromunsatisfactoryrelationship,thesecondoneisconditionedwiththesituationofnothavingapropercandidate,whichwhomaclose,intimaterelationshipcouldbebuilt(Paprzycka,2008,pp.58–59).However,noneoftheaforementionedoptionsreflectanopendeclarationagainstbeinginalong‐termrelationship.Theauthorsofthearticle“LivingAlone:ItsPlace in Household Formation and Change” (2004), quoting researchresultsofLynnJamesonandhercolleagues(2003),claimthatthemajor‐ityofyoungwomenperceivebeingsingleasapassing,temporarysitua‐tion (Chandler et al., 2004). It is visible especially among Polish re‐spondents.Apositiveimageofamodernurbansinglewomanisreceivedwithreluctanceduetothetraditionalviewonmarriageandmaternityasthewoman’slifefulfillment,stillstronglyrootedinPolishculture.“Alonebut not lonely” single women argue, that their openness to havingapartnerandraisingafamilyareelementsofthelifeplantheywanttorealize,therefore,justasEmiliaPaprzycka,Ishallcallthem“Contempo‐raryMarriageables”(Paprzycka,2008,pp.330–332).

Anotherpatternofwomanhood,significantlychangedduetoeman‐cipation,canbeobservedinmarriage.Moreandmoreoftenyoung,edu‐catedwomen,whomakeadecisiontolegalizeand/orsacramentizetheirrelationship, reject traditional,patriarchalofferandchooseequalpart‐nership.Thentheyenterinto“egalitarianmarriages,alsoknownasmar‐riageswithpartnership,whichmeans,thatbothsideshavecareersandtheir identificationmark is compromise, constant negotiation in everysphere of their lives” (Szlendak, 2010, pp. 410–411). Each spouse is—accordingtoUlrichBeckandElisabethBeck‐Gernsheim—an“individualperson,” who pursue their own dreams and professional aspirations.Financialindependenceofbothpartieslimitstheirexpectancesinarela‐tionship to“emotionalsupport” (Beck&Beck‐Gernsheim,2002,p.72).According to the results of research conducted by Renata Siemieńska,the number of people opting for a partnership in the family model israisinginPolishsociety(Siemieńska,2011,p.203).Achievingthistype


ofarelationshipundoubtedlyrequiresanewperspectiveonaquestionof “roles in love life.” Abandoning the traditional image of a romanticfeeling,acontinuationofpatriarchy,allowswomentoregaintheiriden‐tity.Marriage isno longera goal in itself (Szlendak,2010,p.144)andchoosing a partner for life becomes a conscious and independent pro‐cess. “Thepurerelationship”—which ishowAnthonyGiddenscalls thenew, alternative form of regulation in a partnership—is a “close andstable emotional bond with another person” (Giddens, 2007, p. 75),based on the principle of intimacy (Giddens, 2007, p. 117). When wethinkaboutitinthecontextofliberation,wemuststatethatthistypeofa relationship gives a chance of creating new standards for the familyroles.AnnaTitkow’sresearchhasshown,thatPolishpeopleapproveoftheconceptofegalitarianrelationsbetweenmenandwomen,althoughthemodel of partnership, assuming fully evendistributionof duties inprivate aswell as professional life, ismuchmore favoured bywomen(Titkow,2007,pp.229–230).Itturnsoutthen,thattheautonomicpar‐ticipationofbothspousesinfamilyandprofessionalrolesisnotequiva‐lenttototaldevaluationofstereotypizationmechanisms,deeplyrootedin culture. The influence of culturally (re)produced gender inequalitycanbeclearlyseenwhenitcomestodistributingdailychores.Thema‐jority of housework, such as laundry, ironing, cleaning and cooking isstilla“feminine”domain(Giddens,2012,p.374).ResearchinEuropeancountriesconductedbyVoicu,VoicuandStrapkova(2007)confirms it.Thehighestrateofdifferencebetweenmenandwomen isobserved inGreece, Turkey and Malta (above 70%), as well as Portugal, Slovenia,Italy, Bulgaria, Cyprus andAustria (above60%).Also the result of theEuropeanaverageseemstobedistantfromtheideaofgenderqualityinthis matter (53%) (Giddens, 2012, p. 347). The factor which reducesdisproportionofthiskindiswomen’sprofessionalcareer(i.e.onmana‐gerialposts),whichdirectlyforcesmentotakeoversomeofthe“wom‐en’sduties”(Brannon,2002,p.297).

In practice, the regulation ofmutual relations between partners isnottheonlysourceofconflict.Wemustalsomentionthenegativeinflu‐ence of external systems on the family. It can be exemplified throughrelationbetweenwomen’swork life andbirth control.Maternity—stillperceived as a “central attribute of womanhood” (Budrowska, 2003,p.57)—isstillasubjectofprofessionaldiscrimination,as“women’sin‐dividualaspirationsstarttocontradictthefamily”(Slany,2002,p.109).Thereforewecanconclude like JudithM.BardwickandElizabethDou‐


van,thatthe freechoicebecomesapersonifiedoppressor(Bardwick&Douvan,1983,p.182).Awoman is facingan incrediblydifficultdilem‐ma:shouldsheresign(at least foraperiodoftime)fromhercareertogive birth “an economicallyworthless but emotionally priceless” child(Slany,2002,p.106),orshouldshepostponethedecisionaboutbecom‐ingamotherand,likeherpartner,devoteherselftohercareer.

HowPolishwomen try to solve this problem?Empirical data indi‐cates, thatyoung,educatedwomenperceivecareerandmotherhoodascategories which not necessarily exclude each other (Titkow, 2007,p. 162). It appears that for them the family is still an autotelic value(Titkow, 2007, p. 238), and—according to Agnieszka Gromkowska‐Melosik—balancing“workwithbeingamother,spouseandhousewifeisa specific form ofmatriarchy” (Gromkowska‐Melosik, 2008, p. 107). Ontheotherhandthough,accordingtothepublicopinion,“therighttimeforacareer”inmarriedwomen’slifeisaperiodbeforegivingbirthtoachild,orwhenachildisalreadyautonomous“enough”(Titkow,2007,p.237).

Theemergingpatternofwomanhood,“refurbished”withthenewre‐lationship with a partner and a liberal view of self‐fulfillment is con‐fronted with the perpetual, biological determinant of womanhood—maternity and a partial stereotypization of family roles. On one hand,awomanisfreedfromexternalpatriarchalconstraints,butontheother,she isasubjecttothe inner imperativeoftheessentialistonesandbe‐comes—inmyopinion—the“EmancipatedHera”(referringtothemyth‐ologicalgoddess,patronofhomeandmarriage).

Women and mass-media: The paradox of constraining the body for liberation

Whenanalyzingcurrentpatternsofwomanhood, it isworth tono‐ticethemessageconstructedbythemedia,which,accordingtoMargaretL. Andersen “shows women and men are portrayed in stereotypicalways”(Andersen,1993,p.54).Theevidentsexualizationoftoday’scul‐tureandthecultofbeautiful,perfectlyshapedbodycreatesanobligato‐ry ideal of beauty which reduces women to sexual objects. Amodernwomanshouldlookafterherbeautyinordertokeepherbodyfit,vigor‐ousandactive.Simultaneously,inwordsofZbyszkoMelosik,sheis“con‐stantly tyrannized with advertisements and texts from popular maga‐zines”whichbecomea “decalogue”ofhowtostayyoungandbeautiful


(Melosik,2001,p.37).This typeofattitudewouldcertainlydisappoint19th century feminists,who claimed, that the “beauty fixation” servedonlyascompensation.Itwasaformofsubstitutethatregulatedthelackof access to education and professional life for women (Löwy, 2012,p.77).Whenwetrytoexplaincausesofthisphenomenoninourculture,wecanrecallopinionsof IlanaLöwy,adistinguishedscholar. Inoneofthe chapters of her book The Chains of Gender.Masculinity, Feminity,Inequality,shewrites,thatfemalebodyisconstantly“assessed,valuatedand judged”.Theculturally constructedmessagedeclaresdirectly, thata woman should always control her appearance. Immaculatemakeup,perfecthairandfashionableclothesarethequintessenceoftheexternalimageof feminity.Awomancannot allowherself to showany signsofphysiological/biologicalimperfections,whichcouldevenslightlydisruptheridyllic,perfectimage.Shebecomesaslaveofherownbody,satisfy‐ingdesiresofherruthlesscritic,lurkingfrombehindhermirrorreflec‐tion. According to Ilana Löwy, affirming one’s identity through bodyimageisaformofgenderequality.“Therightoflookingatfemalebodyis inseparably linked with inferiority of women’s status. They areobliged to constant thinking of their feminity, that is, of their appear‐ance” (Löwy, 2012, p. 101). PierreBourdieu,who represents a similarway of thinking, says that feminity is perceived as a “symbolic object,whosebeing(esse)isfirstandforemostbeing‐seen(percipi)”(Bourdieu,2004, p. 82).Why then female body is a product of consumption thatarousesdesirein(male?)“consumers”?Tryingtofindananswertothiscomplexproblem, it isworth to refer to theSandraLipsitzBem’s con‐ceptofandrocentrism,seenincontextofmaledomination.Accordingtoher,perceptionoftheworldbasedsolelyonmalepointofviewsituatedwomenonmarginalposition, reducingher to the serving certain func‐tions (usually limited to procreation and caring for her offspring)(Lipsitz‐Bem,2000,p.51).Despitethefactthatrelictsofoldtimeswereconqueredtoalargeextent,someofthemstillremaininthesocialcon‐sciousness, but in a modern form. The message formulated in mass‐mediaaboutthesensualnatureofwomenclearlylimitsherfunctionsto“satisfying male desires” (Lipsitz‐Bem, 2000, p. 139). The reason forsuch situation can be found in early processes of socialization, whichseemstobedifferentforbothsexes.Ittakesplacebecausestereotypical“cultural patterns [are learned] from the nursery years” (Budrowska,2003,pp.55–56).Suchcontrastingwayoflookingontheissueofwom‐anhood (as opposed to masculinity) presents a woman as a creature


diametricallydifferent fromaman; SimonedeBeauvoir inher famousbookTheSecondSexcallsher“TheOther”(Beauvoir,2007).Representa‐tives of the above idea are “proud of exposing their bodies, objects ofdesire, to thepublic” (Löwy, 2012, p. 80), believing that their exposedbodies are not themechanismof constraint but an instrument to gaindominationovermen.

Basingohtheaboveanalyses,wecansingleoutanothercurrentpat‐ternofwomanhood,theresultofsocializationandthespecialinfluenceofmass‐media,whichIallowmyselftodescribesymbolicallyasa“Pop‐CultureStar”.Themoreintenseisthesuperficialglamourofthis“Star”,the stricter andmore determined she becomes in internalizing beautystandards from the culture. Her body is both an object of cult and anobjectoffinancialhopesoflargecosmeticcorporationsandprestigiousfashiondesigners.

The above data does not allow us to create a monolithic—froma perspective of a certain conception—pattern of womanhood, whichwouldunequivocallyreflect the traditionaloregalitarianmodel. Inourtimes, women balance between the two worlds, where deeply rootedtradition (derived from biological determinism) coexists withmodernegalitarianism.Theunquestionablesuccessinthefieldof(re)definitionof gender roles enabled women to access those spheres of social lifewhichwere,notthatlongtimeago,reservedonlyformen.Bycitingthethought of Emilia Paprzycka, I wish to say that “the stereotype of socalledtraditionalfeminityseemstobestillmandatoryintermsofcom‐ponentsofpersonalitytraitsandappearance,externalattributesoffem‐inity,whereasegalitarianmodelofwomanhoodismoreandmoresignif‐icantintermsofcomponentsofwomen’ssocialandprofessionalroles”(Paprzycka,2008,p.190).Therearestillsome“invisible”barriers,orig‐inatingfromthetraditionalviewofgenderissues,seenonlythroughthefilter of biology. Contrary to the popular belief about effectivenessof equality discourse, we can observe the existence of some sociallyconstructed and reproduced stereotypization processes and genderdiscrimination in some areas of public (work,media) and private life.However,wemustemphasizethatitisnotjustmenwhoadoptadichot‐omous, simplifiedstrategyofgenderperception.Somewomen,despiterealizing the model of “modern” feminity, yield to stereotypical pres‐suresofsocializationinsomeaspectsoftheirlives.

Tosumup,Iwouldliketosaythatpatternsofcontemporarywom‐anhood seem to form amosaic of internalized, partly feminine, partly


male attributes, adopted selectively, allowing women to realize theirgoalsandchallengeseffectively,andthattheyareaformofadaptationtothestill—Idaresay—stronglyandrocentricreality.

REFERENCES

ACKER, J. (1990) Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: A Theory of Gendered Organizations.Gender and Society. [Online] 4 (6). pp. 139–140. Available from: http://gas.sagepub.com/[Accessed:15thFebruary2014].

ANDERSEN,M.L.(1993)ThinkingAboutWomen.SociologicalPerspectivesonSexandGender.3rdedition.NewYork:MacmillanPubl.Co.MaxwellMacmillanInterna‐tional,Toronto:MaxwellMacmillanCanada.

BARDWICK, J. M. & DOUVAN E. (1982) Ambiwalencja: socjalizowanie kobiet. In:Hołówka, T. (ed.), Nikt nie rodzi się kobietą. Translated from the English byT.Hołówka.Warszawa:SpółdzielniaWydawnicza„Czytelnik”.

BARTOSZ, B. (2011)Wymiary kobiecości imęskości: od psychobiologii do kultury.Seria Akademicka – Eneteia. Warszawa: Eneteia – Wydawnictwo PsychologiiiKultury.

BATOR, J. (2001) Feminizm, postmodernizm, psychoanaliza: filozoficzne dylematyfeministek„drugiejfali”.Gdańsk:słowo/obrazterytoria.

BEAUVOIR, S. (2007) Druga płeć. Translated from the English by G. Mycielska,M.Leśniewska.Warszawa:WydawnictwoJacekSantorski&Co.

BECK,U.&BECK‐GERNSHEIM,E.(2002)Individualization.InstitutionalizedIndividu‐alismanditsSocialandPoliticalConsequences.Volume3.London:SAGEPublica‐tionsLtd.

BERG‐CROSS, L. et al. (2004) Single Professional Women: A Global PhenomenonChallengesandOpportunities.JournalofInternationalWomen’sStudies.[Online]5(5).p.40.Availablefrom:http://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1551&context=jiws[Accessed:15thFebruary2014].

BOURDIEU, P. (2004) Męska dominacja. Translated from the English by L. Kop‐ciewicz.Warszawa:OficynaNaukowa.

BUDROWSKA,B.(2003)Znikomareprezentacjakobietwelitach–próbywyjaśnień.In:Titkow,A.(ed.)Szklanysufit:barieryiograniczeniakarierkobiet.Monografiazjawiska.Warszawa:FundacjaInstytutSprawPublicznych.

BRANNON, L. (2002) Psychologia rodzaju. Kobiety imężczyźni: podobni czy różni.Translated from theEnglishbyM.Kacmajor. Gdańsk:GdańskieWydawnictwoPsychologiczne.

CHANDLER, J. et al. (2004) Living Alone: Its Place in Household Formation andChange.SociologicalResearchOnline.[Online]9(8).Availablefrom:http://www.socresonline.org.uk/[Accessed:15thMarch2014].

CZERNECKA,J.(2012)Singielisingielkaożyciuwpojedynkę.StudiaPsychologiczne.50(1).pp.139–140.

DOMAŃSKI,H.(2011)Nierównościpłciwlatach1982‐2008.In:Slany,K.,Struzik,J.,Wojnicka,K.(eds.)Genderwspołeczeństwiepolskim.Kraków:Nomos.


GIDDENS,A. (2007)Przemiany intymności.Seksualność,miłość ierotyzmwewspół‐czesnychspołeczeństwach.TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyA.Szulżycka.Warsza‐wa:WydawnictwoNaukowePWN.

GIDDENS,A.(2012)Socjologia,TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyO.Siara,A.Szulżycka&P.Tomanek.Warszawa:WydawnictwoNaukowePWN.

GROMKOWSKA‐MELOSIK, A. (2008) Macierzyństwo, dyplom akademicki i sukceszawodowy kobiet. In: Gromkowska‐Melosik, A. & Gmerek, T. (eds.) Problemynierówności społecznej w teorii i praktyce edukacyjnej. Kraków: Oficyna Wy‐dawnicza“Impuls”.

GROMKOWSKA‐MELOSIK, A. (2012) Sukces edukacyjny‐zawodowy i problem ma‐skulinizacji kobiet. In:Gromkowska‐MelosikA.&Melosik, Z. (eds.).Tożsamośćwspołeczeństwiewspółczesnym:pop‐kulturowe(re)interpretacje.Kraków:Oficy‐naWydawnicza“Impuls”.

JANICKA,K. (1995)Kobiety imężczyźniwstrukturzespołeczno‐zawodowej:podo‐bieństwairóżnice.In:Titkow,A.&Domański,H.(eds.)CotoznaczybyćkobietąwPolsce.Warszawa:WydawnictwoInstytutuFilozofiiiSocjologiiPAN.

LIPSITZ‐BEM,S.(2000)Męskość,kobiecość.Oróżnicachwynikającychzpłci.Transla‐tedfromtheEnglishbyS.Pikiel.Gdańsk:GdańskieWydawnictwoPsychologiczne.

LÖWY,I.(2012)Okowyrodzaju.Męskość,kobiecość,nierówność.TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyM. Solarska&K.Polasik‐Wrzosek.Bydgoszcz:OficynaWydawniczaEpigram.

ŁACIAK, B. (2002) Aspiracje i plany na przyszłość młodych kobiet. In: Fuszra, M.(ed.)KobietywPolscenaprzełomiewieków.Nowykontraktpłci?.Warszawa:In‐stytutSprawPublicznych.

MADDOCK,S.(2003)Kultury,taktykiistrategiezorientowanepłciowo.In:Siemień‐ska,R.(ed.)Aktorzyżyciapublicznego.Płećjakoczynnikróżnicujący.TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyP.Rogala.Warszawa:WydawnictwoNaukowe„Scholar”.

MANDAL,E.(2004)Refleksjekońcowe.Alternatywywobecstereotypówzwiązanychzpłcią.In:Mandal,E.(ed.)Podmiotoweiinterpersonalnekonsekwencjestereoty‐pówzwiązanychzpłcią.Katowice:WydawnictwoUniwersytetuŚląskiego.

MEAD,M. (1982) Płeć i charakter. In: Hołówka, T. (ed.)Niktnie rodzi się kobietą.TranslatedfromtheEnglishbyT.Hołówka.Warszawa:SpółdzielniaWydawni‐cza„Czytelnik”.

MILLET,K. (1982)Teoria polityki płciowej. In:Hołówka, T. (ed.)Niktnie rodzi siękobietą. Translated from the English by T. Hołówka. Warszawa: SpółdzielniaWydawnicza„Czytelnik”.

MELOSIK,Z.(2001)Młodzieżistylżycia:paradoksypop‐tożsamości.In:Melosik,Z.(ed.)Młodzież,stylżyciaizdrowie.Kontekstyikontrowersje.Poznań:AM;Kozie‐głowy:Wolumin.

NOWAK, L. et al. (2012) Raport z wyników. Narodowy Spis Powszechny Ludnościi Mieszkań 2011. [Online]. Warszawa: Główny Urząd Statystyczny. Availablefrom:www.stat.gov.pl[Accessed:11thMarch2014].

PAPRZYCKA,E.(2008)Kobietyżyjącewpojedynkę.Pomiędzywyboremaprzymusem.Warszawa:WydawnictwoAkademickie„Żak”.

RESZKE,N.I.(1991)Nierównościpłciwteoriach:teoretycznewyjaśnienianierówno‐ścipłciwsferzepracyzawodowej.Warszawa:PolskaAkademiaNauk.InstytutFi‐lozofiiiSocjologii:ResPublicaPress.


SARATA,N.(2011)RynekpracywPolsce–płeć,obecność,uczestnictwo.In:Slany,K.,Struzik, J.&Wojnicka,K. (eds.)Genderw społeczeństwiepolskim. Kraków:No‐mos.

SIEMIEŃSKA,R.(2011)Kontraktpłci.Międzysferąprywatnąipubliczną.In:Slany,K.,Struzik, J.&Wojnicka,K. (eds.)Genderw społeczeństwiepolskim. Kraków:No‐mos.

SLANY,K.(2002)Alternatywneformyżyciamałżeńsko‐rodzinnegowponowoczesnymświecie.Kraków:Nomos.

SMITH, M. et al. (2013)Women,men andworking conditions in Europe. [Online].Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Available from:http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/[Accessed:23thMarch2014].

SZACKA,B.(2011)Genderipłeć.In:Slany,K.,Struzik,J.&WojnickaK.(eds.).Genderwspołeczeństwiepolskim.Kraków:Nomos.

SZLENDAK,T. (2010)Socjologiarodziny.Ewolucja,historia,zróżnicowanie.Warsza‐wa:WydawnictwoNaukowePWN.

ŚLĘCZKA,K.(1999)Feminizm.Ideologieikoncepcjespołecznewspółczesnegofemini‐zmu.Katowice:Wydawnictwo„Książnica”.

TITKOW,A. (2007)Tożsamośćpolskichkobiet.Ciągłość,zmiana,konteksty.Warsza‐wa:WydawnictwoInstytutuFilozofiiiSocjologiiPAN.

TONG,R.P. (2002)Myśl feministyczna:wprowadzenie.Translated from theEnglishbyJ.Mikos&B.Umińska.Warszawa:WydawnictwoNaukowePWN.

TYMICKI, K. (2001) Starokawalerstwo i staropanieństwo. Analiza zjawiska. StudiaSocjologiczne.4(7).pp.77–105.

WHITEHEAD,B.D.(2003)WhyThereAreNoGoodMenLeft:TheRomanticPlightoftheNewSingleWoman.NewYork:BroadwayBooks.

WIŚNIEWSKA‐SZAŁEK, A. & WIŚNIEWSKA, D. (2007) Szowinizm płci na stanowi‐skachkierowniczych.Propagowaniekobiecegostyluzarządzania.In:Klebaniuk,J.(ed.)Fenomennierównościspołecznych.Nierównościspołecznewrefleksjihuma‐nistycznej.Warszawa:WydawnictwoPsychologiiiKulturyENETEIA.

WRIGHT, E. O. & BAXTER, J. (2000) The Glass Ceiling Hypothesis. A ComparativeStudyof theUnitedStates,Sweden,andAustralia.GenderandSociety. [Online]14 (4). pp. 277–278.Available from:http://gas.sagepub.com/ [Accessed: 15thFebruary2014].

ZAMOJSKA,E.(2004)Dążeniaemancypacyjnekobiet–równośćwdyskursiefemini‐stycznym.Pampaedia.LeszczyńskieStudiaHumanistyczneWSH.1.p.7.

ZAMOJSKA,E.(2010)Równośćwkontekstachedukacyjnych.Wybraneaspektyrówno‐ściwpolskich i czeskichpodręcznikach szkolnych. Poznań:WydawnictwoNau‐koweUniwersytetuim.AdamaMickiewicza.



BOOKREVIEWS

154 SVI SHAPIRO

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

SusanA.SpeerandElizabethStokoe (eds.),Conversationandgender,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2011,pp.344

Conversationandgenderoffersavaluablecontributiontothecontempo‐rarystudyof the relationshipbetween languageandgender (orsexuality)informedbythemethodsofconversationanalysis(cf.Kitzinger,2000,2007;Schegloff,1997;Speer,2002;Stokoe&Weatheral,2002).Combiningtheory,methodology and practice, it offers the most recent developments in thefield and showcases state‐of‐the‐art researchat the intersectionof genderandconversation.Thechaptersofferuniqueinsightsintotheminutedetailsoftheinteractionstouncoverhowgenderbecomesrelevantinaconversa‐tion.Theythusconstituteasuccessfulendeavouratcounteringargumentsclaiming the inability of conversationanalysis to address issues related tostructuralreality.

Asoutlinedintheintroductorychapter,thisvolumehasatwo‐foldgoal,theoreticalandmethodological.Whiletheformerisexpectedtobroadentheunderstandingoftherelationbetweenconversationandgenderaspartici‐pants’ concern produced locally to accomplish social actions, the latter islargely instructiveandaims toshow thepracticalaffordancesofconversa‐tionanalysis(henceforth,CA)andrelatedmethodologies(membershipcatego‐rization analysis and discursive psychology) for gender research throughdetaileddemonstrationofthesemethodsinuse.

The book comprises fourteen chapters: an introduction and thirteenrelativelyself‐containedandoriginalempiricalstudiesthatallowareadertofocus on selected aspects of gender and conversation. What unites thesecontributions is their reliance on audio‐ or video‐recorded naturally‐occurring data (e.g. domestic telephone calls, face‐to‐face conversations,police‐suspect interviews, calls tohelplinesor children’splay), their treat‐ment of gender as participants’ category and the identification of regularsituatedpracticesinparallelcontexts.

Chapter1servesasageneralintroductiontothefield.Basedonanim‐pressive overview of the existing literature on gender and language re‐search, Susan A. Speer and Elizabeth Stokoe contextualize the distinctiveanalyticpositionofthecurrentbookandprovideasuccinctbutrathersolidcriticaldiscussionoftwootherstrandsofresearchi.e.,thesex/genderdiffer‐enceapproachandthegenderconstructionapproach.Thesecompetingbod‐ies ofwork are contrastedwith the CA‐inspired approach to the study ofgenderandconversation.Here,SpeerandStokoediscuss thesuitabilityof

156 Book reviews

CAforgenderandlanguagestudies.Inparticular,theyhighlighttheproblemofrelevanceandproceduralconsequentialityasintegraltoCAmethodology,aswellasconsiderkeydistinctresearchquestionsaddressedbycurrentCAstudiesofgender.Thechapterendswithabriefconsiderationoftheissuesandquestionsraisedbytheauthors inthisvolumeand laysoutdirectionsfor future research. Importantly, Speer and Stokoe suggest one especiallycurrentguidelinetoproduceCAfindingsaccessibleforuseoutsidetheaca‐demia.

Theremainingthirteenchaptersarelooselyorganizedintofoursectionsunifiedbytheresearchquestionstheypursue.However,certaindialogicorpolemic relations can be identified between the studies within and evenacrossthesections.

PartI:Gender,personreferenceandself‐categorization

The following three chapters seek to address the question ofwhetherlinguisticallygender‐neutralandlinguisticallygenderedreferencetoolsforcategorizingoneselfandotherscanbecomerelevantlygenderedininterac‐tion. This section is openedbyClare Jackson (Chapter 2),who engages inafeministanalysisofnaturallyoccurringtelephonecallsinordertodemon‐strate how the self‐reference ‘I’, typically described by CA researchers as‘referencesimpliciter’(Schegloff,1996,p.440)thatmaskscrucialcategorialinformation(identity‐relatedcategorizationsuchasage,genderorethnici‐ty)aboutthespeaker, is“renderedhearablygendered inthecontextof itsproduction”(p.31). Jacksonextendsthestatusof theself‐reference ‘I’andempiricallydemonstrates“itslocalizedcontext‐specificcapacityforconvey‐ing [gendered and age‐related] categorical information without having toname the category” (p. 36).Heranalysis illuminateshowsocial actorsareexplicitlyorobliquelyorientedtothemselvesasrelevantlygenderedwhenproducingcommonsense (gendered)normsandpositioning themselvesasindividuals inrelationto thesenorms.Giventhisspecificsequentialplace‐mentoftheinvestigatedphenomenon,Jackson’sfindingsconstituteaprom‐isingstartingpointforfurtherresearchonothercategorialinformationandcategory‐neutral personal pronouns as vital tools for negotiating the rela‐tionshipbetweentheselfandsocietyinmultiplesocialcontexts.

Similarly, in Chapter 3, Victoria Land and Celia Kitzinger address thetopicoffirstpersonself‐categorization.Usingdatafromordinarytelephoneconversations, they investigaterare instanceswhenspeakersexplicitlyde‐ployvariouscategorydescriptors(e.g.aschizophrenic,studentorqueer)tocategorize themselves amidst their mundane social activities. Taking onboard Schegloff’s (1997) claims about themultiplicity of social categoriesandcategoryrelevance,LandandKitzingerstraightforwardlydemonstratethat “theavailabilityofa [gender] categorymembership isnotnecessarilysufficientwarranttoclaimthatthismembershipisdirectlyrelevanttothe

Book reviews 157

participantsat thatparticular interactional location” (p.61).Rather this isdetermined by locally accomplished actions. The undeniable value of thisfinding lies in itschallengetodifferencestudies in languageandgenderre‐search. Land and Kitzinger convincingly argue that “gender is not om‐nirelevant” (p. 63), and being aman/womandoes not always presupposespeaking as one. By implication, the reduction of speakers to essentialistgendercategoriesdonebyotherresearchtraditionsrunstheriskofdisre‐gardingparticipants’orientationstotheirmostsalientaspectofidentityatthatmoment.

In contradistinction to the first two contributions, in a theoreticallydenseChapter4,NoaLoganKleinexplicatesthesalienceofgendercategori‐zation in non‐recognitional references to non‐present third parties. Thesereferencesareofparticularinteresttogenderandlanguageresearchersastheyarenotused tobe recognizedby the recipientand functioneitheras‘information‐freeplaceholders’(Kleinp.66)whichdonotcarryanycatego‐rial information about the referent or as ‘simple’ references (Schegloff,1996,p.440).Klein,however,arguesthatgendercategorizationisthemin‐imum amount of information in non‐recognitional person reference thatspeakersneedinthebasicpracticesofrecipientunderstandingandrecipi‐ent production of subsequent references. This makes “gender—perhapseven the—central mechanism for classifying people in English speakingcultures”(p.66). It isparticularlyfascinatingtoseehow, inExtracts9and10,therecipientsresorttotheircommonsenseknowledgeofthecategories‘teacher’and‘boss’intheirstruggletoselectagenderpronounmatchingthepreviously mentioned referent whose gender categorization is obscure.Contrary to Land andKitzinger (Chapter 3), Klein concludes that the sys‐tematic inclusionofgendercategorization innon‐recognitionalpersonref‐erence testifies to “the robustness of gender as a social institution and itsomnirelevanceinsociallife”(p.82).

PartII:Gender,repairandrecipientdesign

Thissectioncomprisesthreechaptersthatlookintohowthecategoryofgendermayormaynotberelevanttothewayspeakersself‐repairtheirtalkand design it for its recipients. Elizabeth Stokoe (Chapter 5) extends thediscussion fromtheprevioussectionand focuseson theself‐initiatedself‐repairof consecutive references toabsent thirdparties toprovideamorenuancedunderstandingofsituatedorientationtogender.Usingaudio‐andvideo‐recordeddatatakenfromaremarkablevarietyofresearchsites(e.g.ordinaryconversation,universitytutorials,police‐suspectinterviews,onlineblogs,asit‐comcomedyorneighbourmediationsessions),sheexploresfourpuzzlingpatternsofrepairswhereonereferentiallyadequategendercate‐goryterm(‘girl’, ‘woman’, ‘lady’)isreplacedorjuxtaposedwithaconsecu‐tive one from the same category collectionused to refer to ‘women’. And,

158 Book reviews

shescrutinizesthemforspeakers’orientationtogender.Stokoearguesthatrepairs are bound to recipient design and analyses her data through thelenses of the ‘speaker indexical’ nature of interaction (Edwards, 2005)whereby speakers, aware of their talk being evaluated by its recipients,designitto“manageboththeobjectsideandsubjectsideoftheactionstheirtalkistoaccomplish”(p.93).Stokoeconcludesthatalthoughtheserepairsare always linguistically gendered, they “may or may not be ‘oriented togenderinthefeminist,politicalsense”(p.111).

InChapter6, SueWilkinsonapplies the conceptof recipientdesign toapre‐fabricatedstretchof talk (‘signature formulation’) thata femalecall‐takerdeliverstocallersonafibromyalgiahelplineinmultiplesimilaritera‐tions.Therecipientdesignoftheinstitutionaltalkcanbeanalyzableassen‐sitive to callers as both individuals and category members. Although theauthorbrieflydiscussesherstudy inrelationto thescriptsof institutionalinteractionintheanalysedhelplinesetting,thiscouldbesupplementedwithareferencetoAnssiPeräkyläandSannaVehviläinen’s(2003)conceptofthestocksofinteractionalknowledge’,thatis,quasi‐theoriesofclient‐professio‐nal interaction.Nevertheless,Wilkinson’smeticulousanalysisof recipient‐designedpractices in termsof their sequenceplacement and interactionalunpacking allows a reader to easily trace fine‐grained details unifying ordifferingthepresenteddataexcerpts.Moreglobally,theanalysisalsoshowshowbyusingCAmethods, insteadofrelyingonpriorassumptionsofgen‐der, researcher can unveil how people do gender in interaction. That is,whileWilkinsonclaimsthatthecall‐takerdisplaysanimplicitorientationtogenderwhensheproffersscriptedtalktodesignatedrecipientswhomshetakestobehearablyfemale(thismayinitiallyseemtoreproducecompara‐tive‘sexdifferences’research),herCA‐informedstudyhoweverstartswithpractice first,and thensheobserveshow theuseof signature formulationcorrelates with “the presumed gender of the participants. Gender is thusendogenous to the interaction rather than imposed upon by the analyst”(p.133).Thechapterendswithasuggestionforfutureresearchto“specifyhowanorientationtogender(orsomeothercategoryset)isconsequentialforthecontentandcourseoftheinteraction”(p.133).

This section closeswithChapter7 inwhichAlexiaHepburnand Jona‐thanPotterengagewithoneofthemostemblematicstrandsofsex/genderdifferenceresearchwhereby tagquestionssupposedly indexwomen’s talkand their inner psychological state of unassertiveness and powerlessness(Lakoff,1975,seealsoO’Barr&Atkins,1980).Thecontext‐sensitivityofCAand discursive psychology allows the authors to empirically examine thefunction of tag questions in recipient‐design where they are contextuallylinked to specific conversation practices. Through a rigorous micro‐levelanalysisofthreeparallel fragmentsof interactiontakenfromdifferent(in‐stitutional and conversational) settings, Hepburn and Potter contradictprevious researchanddemonstrate a systematicpatternofhow tagques‐

Book reviews 159

tionsparadoxicallybecomepowerful invasiveandcoercivedevices forac‐tions that have already been rejected, and participants themselves do notorienttothemasgenderedfeaturesoftalk.Itneedstobestressedthatthestudycautionsagainstmakinganyhaphazardassociationsoflinguisticfea‐tureswithmacro‐socialcategoriesandpsychologicalstateswithoutattend‐ingtointeractionaldetail.Inconsequence,HepburnandPotter’sworkune‐quivocally exemplifies an important research trajectory that breaks withtraditionalsociolinguisticsand,inlinewiththetenetsofthisvolume,treatsgender as the participant’s category, not the analyst’s, and psychologicalthemes as resources for action, rather than underlying identity‐relatedstates.

PartIII:Genderandactionformation

The chapters in this section share a common analytic interest in howgender is relevant, irrelevant or omnirelevant to the accomplishment ofsocialactions.Thefirstcontribution(Chapter8) inthissectionisfromSu‐sanA.Speer,whoexaminestheroleofreportedthirdpartycomplimentsintranssexualpatients’passingas‘real’menorwomen.Theauthorsuccessful‐ly engages the triangulation of data sources taking her empiricalmaterialfrom psychiatrist‐patient consultations in a gender identity clinic, tele‐phone‐mediatedinterviewswithtranssexualusersoftheclinic,andaudio‐andvideo‐recordingsofordinaryconversations.Acrossherdataset,Speerobserves a systematic deployment of reporting third party complimentsthatallowspeakerstoobjectivelyevidencepositiveand/orgender‐relevantfeaturesoftheirappearance,attributesorcharacterinordertogetpositiveassessments,andavoidthenegativecharacterologicalinferencesassociatedwithovertself‐praiseandbragging.Thisispossiblebecauseoftheembed‐dedcharacterof thesecompliments thatcreatesanepistemicdistancebe‐tween the speakerandpraise.Moreover, reportingcomplimentsperformsasubsidiaryroletoothermorefocalactions,whichallowsthetranssexualspeakersto“objectivelyevidencethattheypass[…]as‘real’menorwomen”(p.157),andhencedogenderwhiletheyareinvolvedinotheractivitiesnotconcernedwith performing gender. Speer concludes that if gender is om‐nirelevant(althoughLandandKitzingerinthisvolumeclaimotherwise),“itmakessensethatdoing,indexingandorientingtogenderco‐existwith,andgetwovenrelativelyseamlesslyintothetextureofinteractionalslotswhoseprimary purpose is the accomplishment of other actions” (Speer&Green,2007,p.362).

JackSidnell’sstudy(Chapter9)scrutinizesanothertypeofaction,thatis, joketelling that takesplacebetweenthreemenandawoman.Here thefocusfallsonthequestion,D’youunderstandthathoney?,whichamalecon‐versationalist poses to his female partner. Sidnell’s exceptionally in‐depthanalysis of participants’ verbal and embodied conduct (although I must

160 Book reviews

admititcouldhavebeenabitmoresuccinctlypresented),inparticularhisattentiontogazeandbodyposition,combinedwiththeconceptofparticipa‐tion framework allow him to uncover the nuancedways inwhich the co‐present participants partake in the activity under study. This multimodalanalysis enables him to demonstrate how the question works to “conveya[gendered]categorizationoftheparticipants[…]asprerequisitetounder‐standing [the joke]” (p. 198), and constructs it asdesignedexclusively fora male audience. It is worth noting that through the sequential analysisof the interaction, Sidnell empirically exposes how social actors readily“co‐implicate a larger framework of ‘genders as separate sub‐cultures’”(p.184)toaccountforcross‐gendermiscommunication.Morebroadly,thisstudyexemplifies thatCAtoolsmake itpossible toexcavatepotentialgen‐der differences in talk without the analyst presupposing them before theanalysisproper.Althoughtheauthorhimselfremainscriticaloftheculturalapproachtothestudyofgenderand language, thenotionofgenderdiffer‐ence emerges from his study as a pervasive set of ideas the participantsthemselves,nottheauthor,locallyusetomakesenseofsurroundingreality.

Chapter 10 continues the theme of potentially humorous interaction.WayneA.BeachandPhillipGlennaddressthequestionofhoworientationtogenderbecomesparticipants’concerninbidsandresponsestointimacy.Based largelyoncontiguousphonecallsbetween familymemberswhore‐portanincidentaboutanillmom’ssmoking,theauthorsdemonstratehowmale callers attempt to launchexpandedaffiliation sequences through theenactmentofgenderedrolesandtheproductionofimproprietiesassociatedwithgenderedtopics.Atrociousasitistocomicallydepictafamilymemberdyingof cancer, some recipientsmayeitheraccept suchbids inpursuitofintimacy (this is the case of Excerpts 10, 11which do not come from theanalyzed sequence of calls) or decline to self‐affiliatewith such impropertalkand,asaconsequence,orienttothegenderworkassubsidiarytoothermore focalsocialactivities.Onsuchoccasions, the“genderingof thesceneremains implicit […] gender roles are present but not foregrounded” (pp.214,221).

PartIV:Genderidentitiesandmembershipcategorizationpractices

Eachof the final fourcontributions focusesonhow identitiesarecon‐structedthroughmembershipcategorizationpractices.InChapter11,CarlyW.ButlerandAnnWeatherall,similarlytoSusanA.Speer,takeupthecon‐ceptof ‘passing’and look into itssituatedrealization.Theyoffergoodem‐piricaltranslationofGarfinkel’s(1967)ground‐breakingstudyoftranssex‐ual Agnes, who tried to pass as a woman. Interestingly, the contributorspresent a rare case study of a 6‐year‐old boy (William) who temporarilyassumesanidentityofagirl(Charlotte)in interactionwithhisclassmates.His cross‐gender identity becomes interactionally relevant, is oriented to,

Book reviews 161

consequential and accountablemany a time during the analyzed spate ofinteraction. The authors identify three pervasive and interwoven interac‐tional practices that help the children to “generate, maintain and ignoreWilliam’snewidentityasCharlotte”(p.232).Theseincludethedifferentialdistributionof epistemic rights and responsibilities associatedwith aper‐son’s identity and their social relations, the organization of person refer‐ence,inparticularpersonalnamesandpronominalindexicalreferences,aswellasgendercategorizationactivities.Imusthoweversayatthispointthattheuseof‘passing’inthisstudyisslightlyperplexing.Itsconceptualizationdiverges from the oneproposedbyBucholtz (1995),who views it as “theactiveconstructionofhowtheself isperceived”(1995,p.352)inordertoclaimmembershipintheopposite(e.g.cross‐gender)category.WhileIcanclearly see sucha constructionof the self in thepresenteddata, however,other participants’ displayed (lack of) recognition ofWilliam’s aspired‐foridentitysuggestsnotonlythatWilliam’spassingwasunsuccessful,andthusitshouldbequalifiedasattemptsatpassing,butalsothatitwaspartoftheongoing interactional business. Therefore, what Butler and Weatheralldemonstrate is rather collaborative work on a cross‐gender identity thataccompanies William’s struggle to pass as Charlotte. Nevertheless, theiranalysisclearly illuminates thatgendercategorymembershipand/orevena“quiteremarkableclaimofachangeinidentityandgenderwas[collabora‐tively] accomplished by rather ordinary conversational procedures”(p.249).Thisfindingcanserveasapracticalguidelineforgenderandlan‐guageresearchersonhowand,moreimportantly,wheretoseekevidenceofhowsocialactorsdogenderintheireverydayencounters.

Bythesametoken,MarjorieHarnessGoodwin(Chapter12)alsotakesonboardthequestionofhowchildrenproffergenderidentitiesamidtheireve‐rydaytalk. IntegratingthemethodologicalapparatusofCAandmembershipcategorizationanalysiswithherethnographicobservationsoftwochildren’speergroups, she looks intohow thesechildren’s formulationsofgenderac‐complish affiliative and adversarial alignments or stances in the context ofconflictual interactions, such as disputes, complaints or assessments. Shearguesthat“throughexaminingstance‐takingwecancometogripswiththeconcernsthatdeeplyanimateparticipants”(p.251).Forinstance,theanalysisevidencesaheteronormativesocialorderasacommonsensicalresourceusedandmaintainedbytheparticipants.Also,genderpersonformulationsbecomecrucial tools for maintaining boundaries of the children’s gendered groupsandspaces.Goodwin’sanalysisdemonstratesanintriguingpropertyofcate‐goricalformulations—indexicality.Thatis,genderedtermssuchas‘girl’whenmobilizedasintensifiersduringdisputescancarryeitherpositiveornegativevalanceasaresultofprosodyandembodiedconduct,“thesamepersonfor‐mulationcanhaveverydifferentmeaningsdependingontheinteractivecon‐textinwhichitemerges,asittakesitsmeaningfromtheactivity‐in‐progressbeingproducedthroughitsutterance”(p.268).

162 Book reviews

InChapter13,AngelaCoraGarciaandLisaM.Fisherlookintotheinsti‐tutionalcontextofdivorcemediationwherethecategoryofgenderemergesasparticularlysalient.Drawingonavideo‐tapeddivorcemediationsession,theauthorsexplorehowgenderinequalityiscollaborativelyconstructedbymaleandfemaleparticipantsininteraction.TheaffordancesofCAintegrat‐edwithaninterpretativeanalysisallowtheauthorstouncoverhowpartici‐pantsimplicitlyrelyontheirownexperienceoffamilyandcommonsensicalassumptions regarding the gendered distribution of spousal and parentalrolesinthetraditionalfamilyunitinordertomakestrategicclaimsforcus‐todyoftheiroffspring.Itisinterestingtoobservehowthroughthedetailsoftalk “participants collaborativelyconstruct the localmicro‐politicalgenderorder”(p.291)tothewife’sdisadvantageasonepartytothiscollaboration.Thisisquiteunsettlinggiventheinteractionalworkoftheskillfulandwell‐trained mediators, and their professional theories of interaction againstgender bias. Imust also acknowledge the relevance of the findings to theprofessional concerns of divorcemediators. Although other studies in thevolume(cf.Hepburn&Potter)dohavethepotentialtoaddressacutesocialproblems, their authors—regrettably—silence this possibility. Yet, Garciaand Fisher attend to the issue of practical relevance directly in their con‐cludingremarks.Thistestifiestotheirsensitivitytoreal‐lifeproblemsand,moreglobally,constitutesanindispensablestepforcreatinganewtraditionofappliedCAresearch.

ThevolumeconcludeswithChapter14byJakobCromdal,whocombin‐ingthemethodsandinsightsofCAandmembershipcategorizationanalysisexamineshowchildrenevoke,produceandexploit“someculturallydistrib‐utednotionsofgenderedbehaviour”(p.295).NotonlydoesCromdaldetailhowthecategoryofgender—asapracticalconcern—isorchestratedtodealwith local matters of participation in mundane peer activities (likewiseChapter11),buthealsopresentshow“socialandmoralordersareinvokedand locallyproduced”(p.295) in interaction. Itmustalsobestressed thatCromdal’s study uses bilingual English‐Swedish video‐recorded conversa‐tionsandistheonlycontributioninthisvolumethatdrawsonnon‐English‐languagedata. This comes as a surprise as gender is ultimately boundupwithcultureand language,andstudiesconsideringmultilingualandmulti‐culturaldata could greatlyenrichourunderstandingof gendervernacularknowledgeandsensitizeustohowitisorientedtoinothersocieties.

Insum,Conversationandgenderhasallthatastudyontheintricaterela‐tionbetweengenderandconversationshouldpossess.Itintegratestheory,methodologyandpractice.Agreatassetofthispublicationisitsrebuttalofcharges against CA as too rigorous to address issues related to structuralreality. The studies in this volume problematize long‐lasting assumptionsregardinggenderand languageusegeneratedbyotherresearchtraditionswhich reificated gender essentialism and advocated gender construction‐ism. Thiswould not be possiblewithout the current ethnomethodological

Book reviews 163

understandingofgenderasparticipants’categoryandCAattentiontointer‐actionaldetail.Thecontributionsinthisvolumeaddresssomeoftheincon‐sistencies engendered by the previous studies and further or nuance theexisting scholarly findings of other CA‐inspiredwork. Also, to varying de‐greestheyengagewiththedebateongenderomnirelevanceandfeministCAasaseparatefieldofstudy.

Thiscollectionofpapersisrathertoospecializedtobetreatedasanin‐troductionbynewcomerstothefieldofgenderandlanguagewithintheCAperspective.PartoftheproblemisthetechnicalmachineryofCAasameth‐odology. Nevertheless, the empirical studies yield fresh insights into howgenderisdrawnuponinsocialencounters,andhowitcanbestudiedasanempiricalphenomenon.Theyalsoprovideinspirationsforresearchers,raisenewquestions for futureresearchtrajectories inthe fieldandbring tothefore a plethora of new research sites fromwhich to draw audio‐recordedbutmore increasingly video‐recorded empirical data. Finally, fine‐grainedanalysesoftalk‐in‐interactionmakeexcellentdemonstrationsforresearch‐ersofhowCA‐informedstudiesofgendershouldbeexecuted(seealsoAn‐taki,2011).

BartłomiejKrukAdamMickiewiczUniversityinPoznań(Poland)

REFERENCES

ANTAKI,CH.(2011)AppliedConversationAnalysis.InterventionandChangeinInsti‐tutionalTalk.Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.

BUCHOLTZ,M.(1995)Frommulattatomestiza:Passingandthelinguisticreshapingofethnicidentity.In:Hall,K.&Bucholtz,M.(eds.).Genderarticulated:Languageandthesociallyconstructedself.NewYork:Routledge,pp.351–373.

EDWARDS,D.(2005)Moaning,whingingandlaughing:Thesubjectivesideofcom‐plaints.DiscourseStudies.7(1).pp.5–29.

GARFINKEL,H. (1967)Studies inEthnomethodology. EnglewoodCliffs,NJ: PrenticeHall.

KITZINGER,C.(2000)Doingfeministconversationanalysis.Feminism&Psychology.10.pp.163–93.

KITZINGER,C.(2007)Is‘woman’alwaysrelevantlygendered?Gender&Language.1(1).pp.39–49.

LAKOFF,R.(1975)LanguageandWoman’sPlace.NewYork:Harper&Row.O’BARR,W. &ATKINS, B. (1980) ‘Woman’s language’ or ‘powerless language’? In:

Coates, J. (ed.) (1998) Language& gender: A reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.pp.377–387.

PERÄKYLÄ,A.&VEHVILÄINEN,S.(2003)Conversationanalysisandtheprofessionalstocksofinteractionalknowledge.Discourse&Society.14.pp.727–750.

164 Book reviews

SCHEGLOFF, E. A. (1996). Some practices for referring to persons in talk‐in‐interaction:Apartialsketchofasystematics.In:Fox,B.(ed.)StudiesinAnapho‐ra.Amsterdam:JohnBenjamins.p.437ff.

SCHEGLOFF, E. A. (1997)Whose text?Whose context?Discourse& Society. 8 (2).pp.165‐187.

SPEER,S.A.(2002)Whatcanconversationanalysiscontributetofeministmethod‐ology?Puttingreflexivityintopractice.Discourse&Society.13.pp.783–803.

SPEER,S.A.&GREEN,R. (2007)Onpassing:The interactionalorganizationof ap‐pearanceattributions in thepsychiatricassessmentof transsexualpatients. In:Clarke, V.&Peel, E. (eds.)Out inPsychology:Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual,TransandQueerPerspectives.Chichester:JohnWiley.pp.335–368.

STOKOE, E. H. & WEATHERALL, A. (eds.). (2002) Gender, language, conversationanalysisandfeminism.Discourse&Society(specialissue).13(6).

Agnieszka Gromkowska‐Melosik, Edukacja i (nie)równość społecznakobiet.Studiumdynamikidostępu[Educationandsocial(in)equalityofwomen.Astudyof thedynamicsofaccess],Kraków:OficynaWydaw‐nicza“Impuls”,2011,pp.516

ThebookunderreviewconstitutesanewopeninginthecontemporaryPolish research into education. The author analyses the relationship be‐tween female education and female identity in the context of social(in)equalityadoptinganinterdisciplinaryperspective.Atthesametimeshecarriesoutherprojectboth eloquently andwith ease.Also, thebookcon‐tainsthemostrecentandcomprehensiveinternationalliteratureoverview.

Thepublicationisdividedintotwoparts.Thefirstonecontainstheoret‐ical considerations regarding various “alternative” socio‐educational reali‐tiesinhabitedbythecontemporarywoman.Here,theauthordiscussespro‐cessesofeducationalsocialisationsaturatedwithandrocentricmodelsandvalues.Considerationsofthephenomenonof“learnedhelplessness”ofgirlswithregardtoacquiringmathematicalcompetenciescanbeseenpartandparcel of the same research trend. Furthermore, the issues of social con‐structions of boys’ educational failure are also addressed. The authordemonstrates that their educational achievements are significantly lowerthanisthecasewithgirls.Itisworthemphasisingthepartofthebookthattreats about issues surrounding single‐sex and mixed‐sex education. Theresultsofanalysesaresomewhatsurprisingastheypointtothefactthat—inthemajorityofcountries—womenhavenotonlycaughtupwithmen,buttheyhaveevenbecometheprimaryparties tobegrantedaccess tohighereducation.Thisalsoconcernscountrieswhichhavebeenperceivedasexot‐ic, i.e. Namibia, Jordan or Mongolia. These observations also refer to the

Book reviews 165

stereotypicallymalestudies,suchaslaw,managementormedicineandarevalidforeliteuniversitiessuchasOxfordorHarvard.

Animmenselyinterestingistheinsightintotheidentitiesofcontempo‐rarywomen referring to theneoliberal ideology, the issue ofmasculinisa‐tion of successful women, relocating social aspirations of women to thedomains of body and consumption, and the complicated relationship be‐tweenprofessionalcareerandmotherhood.Theoreticalresearchinthispartof the book, carried out by Agnieszka Gromkowska‐Melosik, draws onarepresentativesampleoftheliteratureinthefield.Onenoticesreferencetothedirectgenderhierarchytheoryaswellasstructuralinequality,whichenable the researcher to provide an alternative view of the dynamics ofaccess/exclusionofwomenfromeducationandfromthejobmarket.

Thesecondpartofthebookisempiricalinnature.Theauthorpresentsresearch results which are the output of a superbly designed qualitativemethodology. Agnieszka Gromkowska‐Melosik carried out in‐depth inter‐views with female managers occupying high positions in corporations aswellaswithfemaleacademicsaffiliatedwithprestigiousPolishuniversities(PhD‐holdersandabove).Asaresult,thereaderisgrantedaccesstoasub‐jective but genuine picture abounding in dilemmas regarding identities ofcontemporary successful women in relation to the following categories:individuality, issues of discrimination against women (also coming fromwomen),motherhood,masculinisationofaspirationsinthebodilyandsexu‐al domains, and the roleof consumption in the constructionof identityoftheresearchparticipants.Inthisway,theresearchertransferstheassump‐tions and theories reconstructed in the first part of the book to the “real”worldwherecontemporarywomenliveandfunction.

Within the developing research into femininities and masculinities,AgnieszkaGromkowska‐Melosik’sbook isadefinitemust‐read.Thispubli‐cationgoesbeyondthestereotypicalperceptionsandanalysesoffemaleandmaleaccesstoeducationandthejobmarket.Theinnovativesuggestionastohowgirlsandboysshouldbesocialised into theirgenders—analterna‐tivetothepedagogiesofgender—isespeciallyworthyofreaders’attention.It isbeyonddoubtthatthisinterestingbookprovidesnewcontextsforso‐cial andprofessional analysesof contemporarywomenandconstitutesanimmenselyimportantstageofanalysesoffemininitiesandmasculinities.

AnnaSokołowskaAdamMickiewiczUniversityinPoznan(Poland)

166 Book reviews

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

Submissions

ProcessofSubmissionArticles and reviews should be submitted by e‐mail at [email protected] (please donot send the files in the .pdf format). The submission should contain the author’s(authors’)fullname(s),affiliation(s),postalande‐mailaddressesonthecoverpage,and be compiled in the following order: title page, abstract, key‐words,main text,acknowledgments (if applicable), appendix (if applicable), and references. The al‐phabetically‐ordered list of references shouldbe supplied at the endof themanu‐script. Obtaining permission for any quoted and reprinted materials remains theresponsibilityoftheauthor(s).

StyleAuthorsshouldfollowtheHarvardReferenceSystemandcarefullychecktheirman‐uscriptbeforesubmission.

CopyrightCopyrightofthearticlepublishedintheJournalofGenderandPower isretainedbytheauthorswithfirstpublicationrightsgrantedtothejournal.

PublicationfrequencyThreeissuesperyearwillbepublished,bothinprintandon‐line(asa.pdffile).

BlindPeerReviewProcessJournal of Gender and Power is a peer‐reviewed journal. All submissions are re‐viewedinitiallybytheeditors.Thesubmissionsthatmeetthescientificandjournal’seditorial standards are sent out for external reviews. JournalofGenderandPoweradherestotherigorousdouble‐blindreviewing,henceeveryarticlewillbereviewedbytwopeerreviewers.Theselectedreviewers,whoareofinternationalreputationandauthority,arenotthemembersoftheeditorialboardandarenotemployedintheinstitutionissuingthejournal.Toensureafairreview,articlesareneversentoutto the reviewers from the authors’ institution. Based on recommendations of thereviewersaswellas consultationbetween theeditorialboardmembers,Editor‐in‐Chiefdecideswhetherthepaperispublished.

ReviewersThelistofreviewersispublishedinthejournalandpostedonthejournal’swebsiteannually.

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2014

List of reviewers for 2014 year

EWABIELSKA–UniversityofSilesiainKatowice(Poland)ERICAHOWELL–CaliforniaStateUniversity,Fullerton(USA)EWAJAROSZ–UniversityofSilesiainKatowice(Poland)ROMANLEPPERT–KazimierzWielkiUniversity(Poland)

ALENAVALIŠOVÁ–CharlesUniversityinPrague(CzechRepublic)OKSANAZABOLOTNA–PavloTychynaUmanStatePedagogicalUniversity(Ukraine)

Book reviews 169

170 Submissions

WYDAWNICTWONAUKOWEUNIWERSYTETUIM.ADAMAMICKIEWICZAWPOZNANIU61‐701POZNAŃ,UL.A.FREDRY10

www.press.amu.edu.plSekretariat:tel.618294646,faks618294647,e‐mail:[email protected]

Działsprzedaży:tel.618294640,e‐mail:[email protected]

Ark.wyd.10,50.Ark.druk.10,625

DRUKIOPRAWA:UNI‐DRUK,LUBOŃ,UL.PRZEMYSŁOWA1