wordplay, sexism and denial

[Brian King]

This is a curly one. I would have thought attention could be paid to such 
denials in order to reveal the hegemonic work that they are doing. By making 
hegemonic ideologies overt rather than covert, hegemony can be troubled. Or 
maybe that's too obvious.

Then again, perhaps Amy has a point, in that the denials are an extension of 
the hegemony behind the sexist expressions. People who gain from hegemony 
seldom feel powerful, and many of us are unlikely to be convinced by 
arguments that attempt to reveal that power. Perhaps, as Butler argues, 
resignifying the language used in 'son of a' constructions might be a more 
effective strategy in the long term. If more of us said 'son of a bastard' the 
point (thought covert) might be more effectively made.

On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 02:18:21 -0500, Amy Sheldon <asheldon at UMN.EDU> 
wrote:

>Since ideology is covert and hegemonic, why should we pay attention
>to "ideological" denials?