body language: labels

[Ruth Pazy-Goldberg]

Could you pls help me un-subscribe to IGALA-L?
Thanks!
R. Goldberg


-----Original Message-----
From: International Gender and Language Association
[mailto:GALA-L at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Amy Sheldon
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 4:37 AM
To: GALA-L at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: body language: labels

On Mar 25, 2008, at 8:13 PM, Joshua Raclaw wrote:

> I'm not sure that referring to these women as "masculine"  
> necessarily conveys that kind of delegitimation.  The term comes  
> off (to me) more as reinforcing ideas about gender fluidity

	of that individual speaker or of  gender display across
speakers?

> rather than the status quo, and I see it used in scholarship most  
> often to challenge the dominant connection between masculinity and  
> male bodies, or the idea that only "feminine" women are real women.

I see your point. However, both interpretations are possible.  Gender  
labels are just too restrictive and the potential to reify   
difference is strong.  Real people are far more complex than the  
stereotypes and caricatures. How can we capture that human  
complexity, which is at times beyond gender, or gender irrelevant?  I  
don't feel that the label "masculine women" does that.  It still  
positions the person who is so-labeled, within the system of gender  
polarities, or stereotypes of gender differences.
>
> On the other hand, I'd probably be more inclined to read about how  
> these women "do masculinity" through conversation rather than a  
> description of "masculine women's conversational style"

To paraphrase Cameron & Kulick Ch. 3, p. 52 _Language & Sexuality_,  
[masculine or feminine women's style] "is more (of)  an idealized  
symbolic concept, than  an empirically accurate account of the speech  
of the 'average' woman [white, professional, English-speaking,  
American]."

Add to this that we really have no data on how this average woman, or  
even a masculine woman, fits her speech to various contexts  
throughout her day, and therefore no idea about her linguistic  
*repertoire*. This  means that we're really basing these categories  
on too little data.  This is tenuous description of real people and  
their subjectivities.  We don't yet know how big a difference there  
is between the representation of what women's talk  is like (symbolic  
and idealized, perhaps superficial and caricatured, thin), and the  
way real women (or men) speak.  Thus, labels ("masculine women") seem  
premature, and potentially limiting.  As if we sufficiently know what  
actual "nonmasculine" women (as opposed to the caricature) actually  
speak like.
Amy

> (which seems to limit the range of gendered subjectivities these  
> women are able to enact through talk).
>
> Joshua
>
>
>
> Joshua Raclaw - PhD student
> Department of Linguistics
> Culture, Language & Social Practice
> Women and Gender Studies
> University of Colorado at Boulder
> http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~raclaw/
>
>
> ---- Original message ----
>> Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:30:54 -0500
>> From: Amy Sheldon <asheldon at UMN.EDU>
>> Subject: Re: body language
>> To: GALA-L at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>>
>> 	One of the problems I have with the idea of describing nondrag
king
>> women as "mascuiline" women, is that it conveys the idea that such
>> women are not "real" women.  Not bona fide. If we stick with labels
>> that come out of the rhetoric of gender hierarchy and gender
>> categories, i.e., the status quo,, that's one of the consequences.
>> Gender is political.
>> Amy
>>
>
>
>
>> On Mar 25, 2008, at 8:23 AM, Cecilia E.Ford wrote:
>>
>>> Amy and all
>>> I could imagine studying the sign language of deaf drag kings,
>>> following on the work of Judith Halberstam on Female Masculinity.
>> 	Agreed.
>>
>>> One could also explore the use of body in drag king performance
>>> more generally.  Interviews with the performers might provide a
>>> grounding in how they identify (or not) with "masculinity" as they
>>> perform (and off stage).
>>
>>> Ceci
>>>
>>> Sheldon wrote:
>>>> Dear Rezenet,
>>>>
>>>> Why call it "masculine"?
>>>> And do native signers use that word?
>>>> Amy Sheldon
>>>>
>>>> On Mar 24, 2008, at 10:32 PM, cappucheeno at YAHOO.COM wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If anyone has this information, please kindly share with me too.
>>>>> I'm doing an independent study on sign language, focusing on
>>>>> masculine women's conversational style.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you Abby for bringing this up.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rezenet Moges
>>>>>
>>>>> Research Assistant,
>>>>> Anthropology Department,
>>>>> CSU, Long Beach
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------Original Message------
>>>>> From: ABIGAIL RITA ARMOUR
>>>>> Sender:
>>>>> To: GALA-L at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG
>>>>> ReplyTo: List for the International Gender and Language  
>>>>> Association
>>>>> Sent: Mar 24, 2008 6:02 PM
>>>>> Subject: body language
>>>>>
>>>>> I am trying to write a paper for a gender and language class at
>>>>> my university about how men and women use body language in
>>>>> conversation.  However, I really do not have any idea where to
>>>>> start and was wondering if anybody had any suggestions.  I am
>>>>> really open to anything along these lines because I am ready to
>>>>> go where the research will take me.  Thank you very much for your
>>>>> help!
>>>>>
>>>>> Abby
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://muddy.erinad.org