Language routinizes power one small step for a man

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ale action (rape) and blaming the victim SO you can imagine statement which describe rape in active vs passive voice. Does a passive voice transformation change the perception of the responsibility of the rapist? Language Routinizes Power “One small step for [a] man. . . One giant leap for mankind” mankind” Use of ‘she’ to describe things men “control”: Use of she to describe things men control The nation/aircraft/ships/cars/guitars When subjects are men reading sexual crime, think it's more harmful in sexual violence in active voice. Doesn't work for nonsexual violence. Sexual violence repsonsibility ratings for male subjects higher than passive voice. Doesn't work for women but does work for men. Use of ‘she’ to describe things men can’t control, but but which have an irrational/chaotic character: “She’s a hell of a storm” “She’s about to blow” (the ships boiler) Language could actually contribute to some type of social hierarchy Might not actual notice lang is doing this but when it's used in regular consistent (biased) fashion, over time might come to conclusion one group of ppl in position of dominance because they always have been & that's the way the world is etc. as opposed to this is a social convention and we can get rid of it if we want to Well known arguments on masc generics. Forbidden masc generics by universities. EX Armstrong...one small step for man he's actually referring to humankind not mankind here. Feminists, -- this kind of lang is biased. Presenting men as standard for which women have to be compared. Men come first, women come 2nd and women = invisible 3 Andocentric coding of man and his Man he his Man, he, his often used to refer to both sexes Feminists have argu...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online