Natan 3.0
Bitch Божји
- Член од
- 17 февруари 2019
- Мислења
- 1.598
- Поени од реакции
- 5.064
Ај, да не биде дека пишувам без поткрепа. За и околу андроцентризмот, од руска Википедија и со кој дел од ова не би се согласилe:
Androcentrism (English androcentrism from other Greek ἀνήρ, anḗr - man + κέντρον, kéntron - spearhead (compass), focus) - a deep cultural tradition that reduces universal human subjectivity (universal human subjectivity) to a single male norm, universal, representative while other subjectivities, and especially women, are represented as subjectivity proper, as a deviation from the norm, as marginal [1]. Thus, androcentrism is not just a view of the world from a male point of view, but the issuance of male normative ideas and life models for unified universal social norms and life models. The practice of placing a female point of view in the center is called gynocentrism.
Content
The origin and use of the term
The concept of androcentrism was first substantiated at the beginning of the twentieth century by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, who wrote the book The World Made by Men or Our Androcentric Culture (The Man-Made World: or, Our Androcentric Culture, 1911), which states:
Our whole worldview is based on an invariable unspoken assumption: a man embodies the human type, and a woman personifies a kind of complementary, accompanying and subordinate assistant, the main essence of which is reduced to procreation. Concerning a man, a woman always performed the function of a preposition - she was always with him. It was always believed that she was above him or under him, in front of him, behind him, near him.
Gilman continues his discussion [3]:
Everything that we observe around, with which we are born and with which we grow up, we consider as the natural order of things - the world is so arranged ...
According to Gilman, what is considered “human nature” is largely just masculine nature. In the end, she concludes that "our androcentric culture was and remains overly masculine, which in no way can be acceptable."
Simone de Beauvoir, without resorting to the very term androcentrism, developed this concept using it in the theory of gender inequality. In the book “The Second Sex”, originally published in France in 1949, she argues that the perception of historically developed relationships between a man and a woman as relations of the type domination - submission, high status - low status or even positive - negative is not the most true . Rather, in cultures dominated by men [4],
A man embodies both positive and neutral traits, which, in fact, is reflected in the common use of a noun (man - man, man) to denote a human being in general. At the same time, the “woman” is only negative traits and is perceived one-sidedly, through the prism of restrictions ... As the ancients had the concept of an absolutely vertical line, with respect to which the deviation angle was measured, in our times there is a special “ordinary” - a kind of absolutely masculine human type. In the female body there are ovaries, the uterus. Thus, a woman becomes a captive of her dissimilarity, outlined by the boundaries of her nature. It is often said that she thinks not with her head, but with her gonads. A man allows himself the luxury of ignoring the fact that his anatomy also includes the sex glands, including the testes, and that these glands produce sex hormones. A man perceives his body in a direct and natural connection with the world, which he comprehends, from his point of view, objectively. At the same time, he perceives the female body as a kind of barrier, as a prison with all aggravating consequences. Thus, humanity, the human race is essentially masculine, and therefore a woman is perceived not by herself, but only relative to man; it is not regarded as an autonomous, separate being ... It is something incidental next to the essential and necessary. He is the Subject, he is the Absolute, she is the Other.
In 1994, Catherine McKinnon, researching the legal aspects of feminism, revealed the legal myth of gender neutrality, which no one else had done before. Although she never used the term “androcentrism,” her main arguments were identical to those presented in this book: men and women differ from each other in many biological and historical characteristics, which, ultimately, is the cause of all aspects of female inequality - from prejudice to pay before rape.
All this is not due to differences between a man and a woman, but because the social world is organized in such a way that only men have a prospect in it, that the needs of men are automatically taken care of, while specifically women's needs are considered or as individual cases, or not taken into account at all. Of all the androcentric institutions listed on the McKinnon list and considered to be typically gender neutral, perhaps not one bears such responsibility for denying women the right to use the US economic and political resources as the employment structure. Many Americans might think that employment is gender-neutral, that certain discrimination against women is illegal, but in fact it is so well organized for a male worker who has a wife who cares for home and children that the differences between men and women have transformed to the greatest detriment of women's interests.
The biological and historical role of women as mothers does not limit access to economic and political resources. It is limited by the androcentric social world, which institutionalizes only one mechanism for coordinating paid work with the obligation to be a parent: having a wife at home who takes care of the children.
American researcher-anthropologist Nancy Riec, analyzing the ideas about men and women, emphasizes the essence of androcentric culture, in which men relate to society and women to nature. Such views are reflected in language, in art and even in science. The main thing in these views is “the symbolic opposition of men as creatures more“ cultured ”, social, women - creatures closer to nature. This gave rise to a series of double oppositions, such as: a woman’s life is biologically motivated, and a man’s life is socially motivated; in women, the foreground is the body, and in men, the thought; women are guided by passions and instincts (maternal, educational), while men are guided by their reason and intellect: a woman’s place is in the family circle, while a man’s sphere is society, politics, business ”[5] [6].
Gender stereotypes
Main article: Gender Role
There is a popular belief that men, more than women, are inherent in will, fearlessness, perseverance, endurance, rationality, courage, logic, belligerence, constancy, determination, the ability to soberly evaluate reality, generalize certain facts, and also that men are more active, businesslike, possess a desire for authoritarianism, prone to work with risk elements. At the same time, they have less than women, developed verbal abilities and intuition.
At the same time, many are inclined to believe that such a tradition is attributed to men by the cultural tradition, and that they are by no means always the characteristic features of a man’s personality. For example, intuition can be well developed in any person, regardless of gender. It must be borne in mind that each man has his own individual character, formed under the influence of various social and hereditary factors.
The term androcentrism is actively used by gender theorists and feminists to criticize the social world of culture, where the characteristics of male and female are diverse and balanced, dichotomously divorced and hierarchically structured. For the existing world of culture and the world of nature is realized (through narrative) on behalf of the male subject, from the point of view of the male perspective, where the female is understood as “other” and “foreign”, and most often is completely ignored. The androcentrism of modern culture is based on the universalist discourse of European science, positioning itself gender neutral and “scientifically” substantiating the gender neutrality of social institutions and structures.
The role of men in society
Historically, in most cultures, men had more rights and enjoyed greater authority in society than women. This tradition is also enshrined in the prescriptions of the widespread world religions. This is largely due to the fact that for a woman, in connection with the birth and upbringing of children, the main life goals were exclusively within the family. Currently, in many Western countries (mainly in Europe, as well as in the USA), there is a tendency to equalize the rights of women and men. The changes that have occurred in relation to women in the 20th century in the West are most clearly characterized by processes such as the sexual revolution and the intensification of feminism as the most organized manifestation of the desire for equality between men and women.
Examples of androcentrism
Main article: Gender Equality
In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted a universal declaration of human rights, which stated that everyone, regardless of gender, has the right to the same freedoms. However, a 1997 report on human development suggests that no state succeeds in achieving this goal.
In professional activity
According to the most recent US census statistics, women earn only 77% of what men earn for the same amount of work. In addition to this gender pay gap, it is very rare to find women in leadership positions in large companies. It is also worth noting that traditional women's jobs, such as teaching and caring for children, are among the lowest paid jobs. [source not specified 1145 days]
Political participation
Despite the fact that women make up half the world's population, they occupy only 15.6% of the seats in parliaments around the world. The absence of women can be traced at all levels of government - local, regional and national. Studies that examined women in leadership positions in Bolivia, Cameroon, and Malaysia found that when women were able to participate in priority spending, they were more likely to invest in family, community resources, healthcare, education, and poverty eradication than men who are more likely to invest in the military industry. Some countries have experimented with a quota system to increase the number of women in politics, although these systems often criticize women in politics simply because they are women, regardless of their qualifications.
Literature
The predominance of male writers in the history of literature is explained not only by certain specific historical conditions (the specifics of female education and upbringing, etc.), but also by the deliberate exclusion from the history of female authors and their texts. Beginning in antiquity, canonical poetics was based on the texts of men; women did not fit into the canon; as a result, female creativity was defined as trivial and amateurish. In the history of art, a woman was praised as a muse and object of worship for a male creator, while she herself was denied the right to work. In most societies today, books, journal articles and reviews are written primarily by men and, as a result, the male point of view is more widely covered. For example, in 2010, only 37% of books published by Random House were written by women, and only 17% of books reviewed by The New York Review Books were written by women. [7] Research by VIDA in 2010 revealed that it was the males who wrote the vast majority of articles and reviews in leading journals in the United States and Great Britain. [8]
A study by Dr. David Anderson and Dr. Michael Hamilton (Mykol Hamilton) showed an insufficient number of female characters in the 200 best-selling children's books since 2001. There were almost twice as many protagonists as males than females, and male characters appeared in 53% of the illustrations. Most of the storylines focused on male characters and their life experiences. [9]
Television and Cinema
Men are directors, screenwriters and producers of the vast majority of films. This can lead to androcentric bias, as most films are related to the masculine vision of the world. According to figures, of the 250 highest-grossing films, 82% were screen versions of books written by men, and only 6% of films were made by female directors. [10] 70% of all movie reviews were written by men. Thus, the number of men exceeds the number of women not only on the screen, but also in the case of writing reviews. [11]
A 2009 study by the Geena Davis Institute analyzed 122 films for children (released between 2006 and 2009). Studies have shown that the number of males exceeds the number of women both on the set and on the screen. The results of the study revealed that 93% of directors, 87% of writers and 80% of producers were men. [12] Thus, the androcentric vision of the world dominated most films. The study reports claim that male dominance is based on male bias (androcentric bias) in the movie storylines. Most characters expressing their opinions are also male, while female characters only evaluate their appearance, youth, and sexuality.
Art
At all times, the image of a man acted as a heroic character, as an object for capture in the visual arts. In the history and theory of art, stable images of a man as an artist-creator and a woman as an object of worship are fully reproduced.
Androcentrism of the language
Language plays a special role in the reproduction of androcentrism, for the linguistic picture of the world captures and reproduces (calls) the world from a male point of view. The following signs of androcentrism are distinguished:
Identification of concepts man and man. In many languages of Europe they are indicated by one word: man in English, homme in French, Mann in German.
Feminine nouns are usually derived from masculine ones, and not vice versa. They are often accompanied by a negative assessment. Applying a male designation to a female referent is permissible and raises her status. On the contrary, the nomination of a man by a female designation carries a negative assessment.
Masculine nouns can be used non-specifically, that is, to indicate persons of any gender. The mechanism of "inclusion" in the grammatical masculine gender. The language prefers male forms to refer to people of any gender or group of people of different sexes. So, if we mean teachers and teachers, it is enough to say “teachers”.
Coordination at the syntactic level occurs in the form of a grammatical gender of the corresponding part of speech, and not according to the real gender of the referent.
Femininity and masculinity are sharply demarcated and opposed to each other, in a qualitative (positive and negative assessment) and quantitative (dominance of the male as a universal) relationship, which leads to the formation of gender asymmetries.
Androcentrism of the language is associated with the fact that language reflects the social and cultural specifics of society, including male dominance, the great value of men and the limited activity of women.
Sport
A sufficiently large significant difference in favor of males was established in relation to somatic signs, functional capabilities and indicators of conditioning abilities (primarily power, speed, endurance). Moreover, these differences are observed already from the early years of playing sports (8-10 years), they fade somewhat in the puberty phase (12-14 years) and again increase to the stage of sportsmanship. The advantage of men in these characteristics sometimes reaches 10-20% or more.
A striking indicator of androcentrism and “gender blindness” in the field of physical education and sports is currently the search for equal opportunities for women to participate in the Olympic movement. The difficulty is that women have a minimal representation in the official bodies of sports organizations with the right to make decisions. National Olympic Committees (NOCs), which control the Olympic sports in individual countries; international sports federations (IFs), which have a monopoly on the representation of Olympic sports; the International Olympic Committee itself, which makes the final decision on the inclusion of sports in the program of the Olympic Games, are organizations, the vast majority of whose members are men.
The basis for the dominance of men in the IOC is, first of all, that the IOC is replenished with representatives of national Olympic committees, where the status of women is very low. In addition, the number of women in the IOC was affected by the lack of age qualifications for its members (who did not leave their posts at a very advanced age). Currently, the increase in the number of women in the IOC is due to the introduction of new NOCs into IOC members, of which women are representatives. Although the IOC at the moment continues to be a rather elitist organization, its desire for democratization is manifested in the fact that it has become more responsive to the opinion of the broad masses, and in particular to proposals for the elimination of gender differences.
Androcentrism (English androcentrism from other Greek ἀνήρ, anḗr - man + κέντρον, kéntron - spearhead (compass), focus) - a deep cultural tradition that reduces universal human subjectivity (universal human subjectivity) to a single male norm, universal, representative while other subjectivities, and especially women, are represented as subjectivity proper, as a deviation from the norm, as marginal [1]. Thus, androcentrism is not just a view of the world from a male point of view, but the issuance of male normative ideas and life models for unified universal social norms and life models. The practice of placing a female point of view in the center is called gynocentrism.
Content
The origin and use of the term
The concept of androcentrism was first substantiated at the beginning of the twentieth century by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, who wrote the book The World Made by Men or Our Androcentric Culture (The Man-Made World: or, Our Androcentric Culture, 1911), which states:
Our whole worldview is based on an invariable unspoken assumption: a man embodies the human type, and a woman personifies a kind of complementary, accompanying and subordinate assistant, the main essence of which is reduced to procreation. Concerning a man, a woman always performed the function of a preposition - she was always with him. It was always believed that she was above him or under him, in front of him, behind him, near him.
Gilman continues his discussion [3]:
Everything that we observe around, with which we are born and with which we grow up, we consider as the natural order of things - the world is so arranged ...
According to Gilman, what is considered “human nature” is largely just masculine nature. In the end, she concludes that "our androcentric culture was and remains overly masculine, which in no way can be acceptable."
Simone de Beauvoir, without resorting to the very term androcentrism, developed this concept using it in the theory of gender inequality. In the book “The Second Sex”, originally published in France in 1949, she argues that the perception of historically developed relationships between a man and a woman as relations of the type domination - submission, high status - low status or even positive - negative is not the most true . Rather, in cultures dominated by men [4],
A man embodies both positive and neutral traits, which, in fact, is reflected in the common use of a noun (man - man, man) to denote a human being in general. At the same time, the “woman” is only negative traits and is perceived one-sidedly, through the prism of restrictions ... As the ancients had the concept of an absolutely vertical line, with respect to which the deviation angle was measured, in our times there is a special “ordinary” - a kind of absolutely masculine human type. In the female body there are ovaries, the uterus. Thus, a woman becomes a captive of her dissimilarity, outlined by the boundaries of her nature. It is often said that she thinks not with her head, but with her gonads. A man allows himself the luxury of ignoring the fact that his anatomy also includes the sex glands, including the testes, and that these glands produce sex hormones. A man perceives his body in a direct and natural connection with the world, which he comprehends, from his point of view, objectively. At the same time, he perceives the female body as a kind of barrier, as a prison with all aggravating consequences. Thus, humanity, the human race is essentially masculine, and therefore a woman is perceived not by herself, but only relative to man; it is not regarded as an autonomous, separate being ... It is something incidental next to the essential and necessary. He is the Subject, he is the Absolute, she is the Other.
In 1994, Catherine McKinnon, researching the legal aspects of feminism, revealed the legal myth of gender neutrality, which no one else had done before. Although she never used the term “androcentrism,” her main arguments were identical to those presented in this book: men and women differ from each other in many biological and historical characteristics, which, ultimately, is the cause of all aspects of female inequality - from prejudice to pay before rape.
All this is not due to differences between a man and a woman, but because the social world is organized in such a way that only men have a prospect in it, that the needs of men are automatically taken care of, while specifically women's needs are considered or as individual cases, or not taken into account at all. Of all the androcentric institutions listed on the McKinnon list and considered to be typically gender neutral, perhaps not one bears such responsibility for denying women the right to use the US economic and political resources as the employment structure. Many Americans might think that employment is gender-neutral, that certain discrimination against women is illegal, but in fact it is so well organized for a male worker who has a wife who cares for home and children that the differences between men and women have transformed to the greatest detriment of women's interests.
The biological and historical role of women as mothers does not limit access to economic and political resources. It is limited by the androcentric social world, which institutionalizes only one mechanism for coordinating paid work with the obligation to be a parent: having a wife at home who takes care of the children.
American researcher-anthropologist Nancy Riec, analyzing the ideas about men and women, emphasizes the essence of androcentric culture, in which men relate to society and women to nature. Such views are reflected in language, in art and even in science. The main thing in these views is “the symbolic opposition of men as creatures more“ cultured ”, social, women - creatures closer to nature. This gave rise to a series of double oppositions, such as: a woman’s life is biologically motivated, and a man’s life is socially motivated; in women, the foreground is the body, and in men, the thought; women are guided by passions and instincts (maternal, educational), while men are guided by their reason and intellect: a woman’s place is in the family circle, while a man’s sphere is society, politics, business ”[5] [6].
Gender stereotypes
Main article: Gender Role
There is a popular belief that men, more than women, are inherent in will, fearlessness, perseverance, endurance, rationality, courage, logic, belligerence, constancy, determination, the ability to soberly evaluate reality, generalize certain facts, and also that men are more active, businesslike, possess a desire for authoritarianism, prone to work with risk elements. At the same time, they have less than women, developed verbal abilities and intuition.
At the same time, many are inclined to believe that such a tradition is attributed to men by the cultural tradition, and that they are by no means always the characteristic features of a man’s personality. For example, intuition can be well developed in any person, regardless of gender. It must be borne in mind that each man has his own individual character, formed under the influence of various social and hereditary factors.
The term androcentrism is actively used by gender theorists and feminists to criticize the social world of culture, where the characteristics of male and female are diverse and balanced, dichotomously divorced and hierarchically structured. For the existing world of culture and the world of nature is realized (through narrative) on behalf of the male subject, from the point of view of the male perspective, where the female is understood as “other” and “foreign”, and most often is completely ignored. The androcentrism of modern culture is based on the universalist discourse of European science, positioning itself gender neutral and “scientifically” substantiating the gender neutrality of social institutions and structures.
The role of men in society
Historically, in most cultures, men had more rights and enjoyed greater authority in society than women. This tradition is also enshrined in the prescriptions of the widespread world religions. This is largely due to the fact that for a woman, in connection with the birth and upbringing of children, the main life goals were exclusively within the family. Currently, in many Western countries (mainly in Europe, as well as in the USA), there is a tendency to equalize the rights of women and men. The changes that have occurred in relation to women in the 20th century in the West are most clearly characterized by processes such as the sexual revolution and the intensification of feminism as the most organized manifestation of the desire for equality between men and women.
Examples of androcentrism
Main article: Gender Equality
In 1948, the UN General Assembly adopted a universal declaration of human rights, which stated that everyone, regardless of gender, has the right to the same freedoms. However, a 1997 report on human development suggests that no state succeeds in achieving this goal.
In professional activity
According to the most recent US census statistics, women earn only 77% of what men earn for the same amount of work. In addition to this gender pay gap, it is very rare to find women in leadership positions in large companies. It is also worth noting that traditional women's jobs, such as teaching and caring for children, are among the lowest paid jobs. [source not specified 1145 days]
Political participation
Despite the fact that women make up half the world's population, they occupy only 15.6% of the seats in parliaments around the world. The absence of women can be traced at all levels of government - local, regional and national. Studies that examined women in leadership positions in Bolivia, Cameroon, and Malaysia found that when women were able to participate in priority spending, they were more likely to invest in family, community resources, healthcare, education, and poverty eradication than men who are more likely to invest in the military industry. Some countries have experimented with a quota system to increase the number of women in politics, although these systems often criticize women in politics simply because they are women, regardless of their qualifications.
Literature
The predominance of male writers in the history of literature is explained not only by certain specific historical conditions (the specifics of female education and upbringing, etc.), but also by the deliberate exclusion from the history of female authors and their texts. Beginning in antiquity, canonical poetics was based on the texts of men; women did not fit into the canon; as a result, female creativity was defined as trivial and amateurish. In the history of art, a woman was praised as a muse and object of worship for a male creator, while she herself was denied the right to work. In most societies today, books, journal articles and reviews are written primarily by men and, as a result, the male point of view is more widely covered. For example, in 2010, only 37% of books published by Random House were written by women, and only 17% of books reviewed by The New York Review Books were written by women. [7] Research by VIDA in 2010 revealed that it was the males who wrote the vast majority of articles and reviews in leading journals in the United States and Great Britain. [8]
A study by Dr. David Anderson and Dr. Michael Hamilton (Mykol Hamilton) showed an insufficient number of female characters in the 200 best-selling children's books since 2001. There were almost twice as many protagonists as males than females, and male characters appeared in 53% of the illustrations. Most of the storylines focused on male characters and their life experiences. [9]
Television and Cinema
Men are directors, screenwriters and producers of the vast majority of films. This can lead to androcentric bias, as most films are related to the masculine vision of the world. According to figures, of the 250 highest-grossing films, 82% were screen versions of books written by men, and only 6% of films were made by female directors. [10] 70% of all movie reviews were written by men. Thus, the number of men exceeds the number of women not only on the screen, but also in the case of writing reviews. [11]
A 2009 study by the Geena Davis Institute analyzed 122 films for children (released between 2006 and 2009). Studies have shown that the number of males exceeds the number of women both on the set and on the screen. The results of the study revealed that 93% of directors, 87% of writers and 80% of producers were men. [12] Thus, the androcentric vision of the world dominated most films. The study reports claim that male dominance is based on male bias (androcentric bias) in the movie storylines. Most characters expressing their opinions are also male, while female characters only evaluate their appearance, youth, and sexuality.
Art
At all times, the image of a man acted as a heroic character, as an object for capture in the visual arts. In the history and theory of art, stable images of a man as an artist-creator and a woman as an object of worship are fully reproduced.
Androcentrism of the language
Language plays a special role in the reproduction of androcentrism, for the linguistic picture of the world captures and reproduces (calls) the world from a male point of view. The following signs of androcentrism are distinguished:
Identification of concepts man and man. In many languages of Europe they are indicated by one word: man in English, homme in French, Mann in German.
Feminine nouns are usually derived from masculine ones, and not vice versa. They are often accompanied by a negative assessment. Applying a male designation to a female referent is permissible and raises her status. On the contrary, the nomination of a man by a female designation carries a negative assessment.
Masculine nouns can be used non-specifically, that is, to indicate persons of any gender. The mechanism of "inclusion" in the grammatical masculine gender. The language prefers male forms to refer to people of any gender or group of people of different sexes. So, if we mean teachers and teachers, it is enough to say “teachers”.
Coordination at the syntactic level occurs in the form of a grammatical gender of the corresponding part of speech, and not according to the real gender of the referent.
Femininity and masculinity are sharply demarcated and opposed to each other, in a qualitative (positive and negative assessment) and quantitative (dominance of the male as a universal) relationship, which leads to the formation of gender asymmetries.
Androcentrism of the language is associated with the fact that language reflects the social and cultural specifics of society, including male dominance, the great value of men and the limited activity of women.
Sport
A sufficiently large significant difference in favor of males was established in relation to somatic signs, functional capabilities and indicators of conditioning abilities (primarily power, speed, endurance). Moreover, these differences are observed already from the early years of playing sports (8-10 years), they fade somewhat in the puberty phase (12-14 years) and again increase to the stage of sportsmanship. The advantage of men in these characteristics sometimes reaches 10-20% or more.
A striking indicator of androcentrism and “gender blindness” in the field of physical education and sports is currently the search for equal opportunities for women to participate in the Olympic movement. The difficulty is that women have a minimal representation in the official bodies of sports organizations with the right to make decisions. National Olympic Committees (NOCs), which control the Olympic sports in individual countries; international sports federations (IFs), which have a monopoly on the representation of Olympic sports; the International Olympic Committee itself, which makes the final decision on the inclusion of sports in the program of the Olympic Games, are organizations, the vast majority of whose members are men.
The basis for the dominance of men in the IOC is, first of all, that the IOC is replenished with representatives of national Olympic committees, where the status of women is very low. In addition, the number of women in the IOC was affected by the lack of age qualifications for its members (who did not leave their posts at a very advanced age). Currently, the increase in the number of women in the IOC is due to the introduction of new NOCs into IOC members, of which women are representatives. Although the IOC at the moment continues to be a rather elitist organization, its desire for democratization is manifested in the fact that it has become more responsive to the opinion of the broad masses, and in particular to proposals for the elimination of gender differences.
Последно уредено:
