What an interesting question. What role do I think gender plays in myself?
Likely a significant one. My foundational worldview was a sort of theologically inspired stoicism, and there's a large amount of ingrained genderal archetypes built in. "A man is the sum total of his responsibilities", or perhaps Aurelius' "we must endure and toil without complaining" (although that last part didn't stick terribly well). My father was a god fearing military man and my mother a good christian wife. These were clearly defined identities as role models. I don't think it defines my world view significantly now, but it certainly provides the framework from which that worldview operates. If nothing else, it becomes a comparative measure, in how my thoughts or feelings stack up against that structure. My romantic, artistic, sensitive parts are all accented by and measured against the stoic mirror I was raised to hold as the ideal. I think there's a significant amount of my thought processes that are affected by my hormonal structure, and I've most certainly noticed the general change in my personality and demeanor over time as my overcharged teenage testosterone production settles comfortably into a middle aged rhythm. We're not quite so ready to raise our fists, even figuratively, as we age. The effects on my psychology of my physiology (especially as related to gender) are clear and unmistakable. So yeah, I suppose quite a bit. On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 5:33 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > Seyla Benhabib refuses to join poststructuralists in declaring the death > of the autonomous, self-reflective individual who is capable of taking > responsibility and acting on principle. Although she is committed to > viewing people as socially situated, interpersonally bonded, and embodied, > she is also committed to the feasibility of rational philosophical > justification of universal moral norms (Allan's moral compass). Moreover, > she argues that a narrative conception of the self renders the idea of a > core self and coherent identity intelligible without suppressing difference > and without insulating the self from social relations (a problem I have > with personal development approaches). Autobiographical stories can include > the many voices within us and the many relationships we have experienced, > and these stories are constantly under revision, for they are always being > contested by our associates' disparate self-narratives with their divergent > versions of events. Nevertheless, these narratives do not collapse into > incoherence, and they presuppose a core capacity to describe and reflect on > one's experience. For Benhabib, this view of selfhood and reason is > indispensable to feminist emancipatory objectives. > > This was more or less my approach in teaching on gender issues over many > years. Its great advantages include not needing the incredible complexity > of much standard feminist literature and letting people work with their own > stories, creative action, having fun with each other and forming their own > learning groups, assessment criteria ... whatever. I'd throw in some > biology - not all physical women are XX, men and women may have the > opposite sex's general brain structure-functioning and gender and self as > we generally think of them are not supported by much modern biology of the > individual. With luck, my teaching would soon be subverted by actual > interests in the class. > > What role do we think gender plays in self? What are the forces that > cause this? > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
