Negotiating Womanly Roles: Identity and Space
I remember my first encounter with the concept of woman. She was about eleven inches tall with big blue eyes, round breasts, tight rear, and long flowing blonde hair. She had beautiful clothes, cars, and houses—even a perfect anatomical male counterpart. She was Barbie, and she represented what I thought women should be. In the bright pink packaging, she smiled with her perfect teeth down at my adoring face. I begged, pleaded, and demanded that this doll be purchased for me. On rare occasions, I got my perfect woman doll, but Barbie never remained in her pristine state. Like many other girls, I kept Barbie as perfect as I could until I could no longer resist the urge to “make improvements.” The scissors, markers, and instruments of doll torture came out leaving Barbie ravaged with uneven hair, colorful tattoos, and stripped of her clothes. Womanly perfection did not last in my destructive hands, or perhaps I restructured perfection into my definition not someone else's ideal.
If Barbie is not my ideal definition of woman, then what is woman? How does she function? I cannot offer a broad, universalist answer to either of these questions, but I can frame my answers within the idea of negotiation. For me, negotiation is an ongoing process in which I orient and reorient my self-conceptualization of identity based upon both external messages and internal narratives. I picture these negotiations that take place as beginning from within and progressively radiating outward. As I restructured Barbie to fit my concept of woman, I am always reframing, restructuring how I negotiate representations of my identity and space—my definition of woman.
As a woman, I am constantly reframing my identity. My feminine identity is not a static construct, but a fluid movement that interweaves personal internal narrative with the external messages about my identity. This does not mean that I exist as a unified identity. The process of negotiating requires at times that I bifurcate both outward and inward representations of self/identity. In Pan Chao's conduct treatise, she admonishes her daughters to construct an internal narrative of their beliefs(17). While these daughters may choose to remain silent about their internal narratives, theses constructs form an internal identity which manifests itself on the outward performance of the body. The outward performative act serves as buffer or defensive strategy to protect the woman while still allowing her to formulate her own set of ideals. For the modern woman, she has more power to choose what she keeps hidden and what she manifests. The woman recognizes the disjunct between these two narratives—one remains hidden in its entirety, and the performance of the inner narrative is open to the critique of others. Many women choose to keep their full inner narratives hidden and display only what they choose.
I believe that a woman's identity does not strive for unity between internal narrative and external performance. Through the internal negotiation of identity, a woman chooses a belief system, and this allows her to navigate the disjuncts between outward performance and inward narrative. In Treasure of the City of Ladies, Christine de Pizan advocates that women privilege their relationship toward God over societal expectations. With this caveat, the woman must practice an outward sincerity even though they disagree with the other person's actions(45). Women create an outward performative persona that will allow them to mask the conflicts that exist within their internal narrative or identity. By splitting the internal narrative from the external performance, these actions give the woman power over her identity by keeping her personal beliefs secret. She controls the full disclosure of her beliefs. This makes identity construction for the woman as an active process rather than a passive event in which society's ideals are imprinted upon woman .
Once the woman acknowledges the disjunct between the internal narrative and outward performance, she must negotiate the presence and performance of her body. I think this is a space in which a woman can have some form of unity. Since the body houses the internal narrative and identity, the body serves a janus function in that it unifies internal/external in one form, but it divides its function between performing as a defensive mechanism to protect the woman's unspoken ideologies and a visible marker of the effects of social construction. We see this division of internal narrative most clearly in Charlotte Perkins Gilman's “The Yellow Wallpaper.” The female narrator has an overwhelming, almost disabling desire to express her internal narrative that she desires to be active through writing and social engagements, but her body and family force her to retreat inside her mind. In this moment, her body becomes her prison since the body cowers to the demands placed up it by the narrator's external familial relationships. We see the bifurcated identity from the body with the narrator identity. The body becomes the shell in which women retreat to protect themselves.
A woman's body negotiates the space between the inner narratives and the bodies' performances. The internal narrative occupies the position of power for women, but the body becomes a subjugated entity. According to Nancy Mairs in “Carnal Acts,” women displace their frustrations with patriarchal ideals of female perfection upon the body(394). Since women occupy a subjugated position in the patriarchal hierarchies, women attempt to have power/control over their minds and bodies. The body bears the markers of patriarchal hierarchies in that women adopt modes of dress, cosmetics, and physical shape,.The female body openly reinscribes power back upon patriarchy. In this way, women divorce their identity or internal narrative from the body. According Susan Bordo in her introduction to her book Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body, this reinforces in the mind of women that their bodies are viewed negatively(5). The body provides a protective layer for the identity. The mind or internal narrative can only be revealed through speech or the body. If a woman is silent, then she protects her internal narrative from social scrutiny. Her body is always visible marker of her adherence to societal norms of dress, appearance, and modesty.
Both the identity and body negotiate interrelations that are at work within the woman. These negotiations become a balancing act for woman since she must protect and divulge the inner narrative through the vehicle of her body; however, this interplay is not her agency. She enacts her rhetorical agency in the way she negotiates her participation in domestic/public spheres. Through these interactions, she gives voice to her inner narrative and acknowledges the body as a vehicle for her participation. Since the concept of woman begins with the inner narrative and radiates out through the body, the space in which woman first enacts her agency is within the domestic sphere. According to Hilary Rodham Clinton in her speech “Women’s Rights are Human Rights ,” the domestic sphere houses the potential for enacting social change if the work performed in this space is given its proper recognition(4). The domestic sphere acts ideally as a safe haven in which women can make conscious choices that reinforce their inner narrative belief systems.
Women use their inner narratives as a guide for the early education of their children which takes place in the domestic sphere. According to bell hooks in “Engaged Pedagogy,” education should encompass all areas of a person's existence—body, soul, and mind. When women educate their children based upon inner narrative belief systems, they are putting into practice this idea of whole person education. Children see and mimic how women interact with their spouses which mirrors the gender normative roles in the public sphere. This places the woman in a position of power since the gaze of her children remains upon her negotiations of her inner narrative and body. In the 1939 film version of The Women, Mary Haines models this process for her daughter little Mary . Mary would not tolerate her husband's infidelity within her inner narrative. She enacts her agency through divorce; however, she still keeps the domestic sphere a safe haven for her daughter and herself. It is her retreat from the public sphere. Her performance of agency in the domestic sphere guides little Mary's potential future ideas of agency in both the domestic/public spheres. This education of children is a way in which women negotiate and enact agency within the domestic sphere.
As women practice their agency within the domestic sphere, they must also negotiate how that agency will and should be practiced in the public sphere—particularly, the academic public sphere. Women again experience a bifurcation of their identities since they enact their agency within the domestic sphere, but they are readily subjugated within the academic public sphere. Within the domestic sphere, women create their own discursive spaces in which they may speak the language of their inner narrative. According to Elizabeth Flynn in her essay “Composing as a Woman,” the academy does not recognize that women communicate with narrative(125). For women to practice agency in the academic public sphere, they must cross-dress and perform or communicate as men in order to heard in the academy. If they choose to remain in the academy, they could potentially experience an erasure of their feminine identities as well as their personal inner narratives. This is when I see feminist rhetorical agency as functioning differently than masculine rhetorical agency. For women, they negotiate the power that they have in the domestic sphere as a form of agency and synthesize the nurturing agency with argumentative agency that is heard in the academy. I see this as unifying the language of the domestic sphere within that of the public sphere. The new discursive space allows for an ongoing negotiation of women's identities in which the domestic sphere's discourse finds place within the academy. This allows women to function as women rather than performing as men.
I return to my first questions—what is woman? How do we conceptualize woman? My idea of woman does not existence in some idealized plastic doll but in the framing and reframing of my identity through the negotiations of inner narrative, body, and space. I enact my agency through my negotiations as a woman.
Works Cited
Bordo, Susan R. Introduction. Unbearable Weight: Feminism, Western Culture, and the Body. Berkeley: U of CA P, 1993. 1-42.
Clinton, Hillary Rodham. “Women’s Rights are Human Rights.” http://www.americanrhetoric.com
de Pizan, Christine. The Treasure of the City of Ladies. Trans. Sarah Lawson. Rev. Ed. London: Penguin, 2003.
Flynn, Elizabeth. "Composing as a Woman." College Composition and Communication 39 (December 1988), 123-35.
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. “The Yellow Wallpaper.” The Norton Anthology of Literature by Women. Ed. Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar. New York: Norton, 1985. 1148-61.
hooks, bell. “Engaged Pedagogy.” Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. New York: Routledge, 1994. 13-22
Mairs, Nancy. “Carnal Acts.” Available Means: An Anthology of Women’s Rhetoric(s). Ed. Joy Ritchie and Kate Ronald. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 2001. 392-400.
Pan Chao. “Lessons for Women (First century).” Rhetorical Theory by Women Before 1900. Ed. Jane Donawerth. Lanham: Rowen and Littlefied, 2002. 15-21.
The Women. Screenplay by Anita Loos and Jane Murfin. Dir. George Cukor. Metro-Goldwyn- Mayer, 1939. Video. Turner Entertainment, 2001. DVD. Turner Entertainment, 2005.
Women's Rights Rhetoric
The rhetoric of women's rights has blossomed with the voices of Sojourner Truth, Hilary Rodham Clinton, and bell hooks creating a discursive space for women to discuss their rights. Each of these women has interrogated how rights are afforded and denied to women—rights that should encompass all humanity. So, why women's rights? Do not human rights encompass women's rights? Women's right activists clamor to be heard; however, other rights' rhetorics are begging to be heard as well in the public sphere. With so many speaking, the public sphere is drowned in a cacophony of rights' rhetors, but the public sphere does not recognize the message of many of these groups. The great noise of rights' rhetorics silences the message; thus, many rights continue to be violated, in particular, women's rights.
In her speech to the Convention on Women's Rights held in China(read text here), Hilary Rodham Clinton delineates the importance of women's rights. She articulates how the domestic sphere or the woman's domain is influencing the public sphere. She provides those who are heavily invested in the public sphere a valuable cache for protecting the domestic sphere underneath the banner of human rights. When the domestic sphere is devalued, the public sphere loses value as well. The home is the locus from which the public sphere gains stability and can perform its function in society. The women who labor in the domestic sphere support husbands and raise children. These actions reproduce another generation to work in the public sphere. We should place more value upon the work that is performed at home rather than devaluing its lack of visible influence within the public sphere. When women's work is valued, women gain their rights.
In the academic community, we bemoan the current state of women's rights. We focus so much of our efforts on championing the marginalized woman's domestic work. This is not to say these third world women or low income women do not need us to speak about their cause; however, by focusing our discourse on the other, we risk denying a discursive space for another group of women, in particular, the “middle-class” mother. According to Clinton, the mother labors within the domestic sphere whose work we should value. We neglect her cause. Perhaps, we assume that she has been given rights already because she occupies a pseudo-position of power or through her marital status or through her race. Who are we in our academic community to privilege one woman's rights over another? In her speech, Clinton does not differentiate between which domestic sphere—the Western or third world—has more value or needs more support in the public sphere. We need to question consistently our motivations for participating in women's rights rhetoric and the repercussions of our speech. Who are we marginalizing or worse silencing?
As a female academic and mother, I am truly inspired as I read and reread Hilary Clinton's speech. My work in the domestic sphere has value, and there are women laboring to show its importance; however, in the academic community, I must bifurcate my roles as academic and domestic. I discuss in graduate seminars the rights of other women and their silencing within the domestic sphere, but I do not speak of my participation within the domestic sphere. When I do speak about my dual role as an academic and mother, I am usually explaining why I can't fully participate within the academic community. I can only attend so many conferences or apply to a select few PhD programs. This usually receives the awkward silence which is followed by the suggestion that maybe being an academic is not “right” career path for me. So, I remain silent about my domestic role and continue working on my academic pursuits. One day, my domestic labour will hold some cache in the academic community.
Subscribe To http://tolstoy2tinkerbell.blogspot.com/
Subscribe To http://tolstoy2tinkerbell.blogspot.com/
Thankful musings after the bitter diatribe:
- How the dark and stormy night gave way to a blue sky full of sunlight--sparkles over the wet grass.
- Deep breaths of clean air and sips of pure water.
- Grace to heal my battle scars as I journey through my faith.
- Sleeping dogs who know when a good cold nose is needed.
- Eyes that see, ears that listen, and a mouth that can shut up long enough to do the first two things.
For those who prefer to read happy, thankful posts(which I think I am the only one reading my blog--this could be most cathartic but I will rant in depth later), this is NOT that post...No, I am not bitching about how bad my life is but the struggles that I am having, musing about intellectual stuff that no one wants to voice out loud...I may cover these in more detail but here they are:
- Am I the only one who see the oxymoron in "literally interpretation" of the Bible?
- Why is submission taught as the wife is a voiceless, servant to the husband? No, I do not believe in submission as I have no rhetorical agency, no rational thought, or control over my body...I am not a concubine, nun, or reproductive machine.
- Why does Christianity appear to favor the masculine gender? Am I to be silent, submissive, and a second class citizen in church? I don't think so.
- Also, I do not believe that God has gender. I believe that God uses gender so that our finite minds can comprehend God's personhood. We can't break out of the binary of gender so God presents the Godhead as masculine. With this caveat, I believe Jesus is male. Just because God genders himself male does not mean that my female gender is any less valued or second class.
- Why is it that unbelievers/non-Christians are much better Christians than Christians? I have friends outside my Christian bubble who show more care and concern than my so-called Christian friends. They do weird things like return phone calls, emails, etc. Why can't my so-called Christian friends do this because they are SO busy. I teach 3 college classes, full-time English graduate student, wife, 2 kids, 3 dogs...NO, I have NO clue what busy is but I tried to make time for some of them.
- Could a best friend at this moment--job is open till filled, well, always open...
Today, I lit a fire, threw gasoline on it, then tried to put it out with napalm...well, hyperbole has always been a useful linguistic tool. As a college developmental reading instructor, I needed something...okay, ANYTHING, to keep my students attention on the material rather than counting down the milliseconds until our four day weekend. Of course, I, too, was counting down the milliseconds until I could leave on my four day weekend. What began has a simple discussion of societal stressors--situation in Iran, earthquake in Chile, Jihad Jane, gas prices, etc.--turned into an insightful discursive space. With each new issue, I noticed my students levels of discomfort rise. They were moving away from politically correct or what the teacher wants to hear to speaking what they always wanted to say but thought they couldn't. This was uncharted territory.
I think Jihad Jane was the napalm. She is a white American female who promotes militant terrorism allegedly. When asked to visualize her, each class depicted her as an Arabic woman not a suburban American woman. Her actions did not fit the stereotype terrorist; whoever or whatever that is. Once the shock of her identity sunk into my students' minds, the flood of violent, sexist comments were spewing from their mouths--she should just die, be tortured, exiled, etc. Her existence defied the stereotype and made them uncomfortable. Rather than discuss what about her was disconcerting, denial and eradication were the best options. Of course, being the instructor, I did attempt to move them in that direction whether I was successful remains to be seen.
Sure, I got the lively class discussion that I wanted, but will it continue? I find that we don't open up spaces for discourse about stereotypes, race, gender, and religion outside of those who hold the same values. Is it that I fear being judged? Yes. I feel judged no matter what stance I take. I'm Christian feminist...so now my traditional Bible thumping, skirt wearing, friends will judge me as bad Christian... try to show me that I am wrong in how I label myself. Then, I will have feminist friends judge me for believing in a misogynistic text. I don't fit in, contradict myself, but this is a space in which I can do just that. Judge me if you want.
Welcome to From Tolstoy to Tinkerbell... embracing contradictions and pursuing intellectual questions...I have no clue what this means, but I am invested in finding answers or asking questions. These will be my questions--questions that I must work through. I have come to a point in my life when I am not worrying about stating my views and opening up my ideas for discourse. Join me in embracing contradictions...
