(Photo courtesy of Zazzle.com)
A
few days ago, I was eyeing some of the back-to-school stationary on
zazzle. (Because I'm a proper grown up, yes.) For some reason, zazzle
sells not just diaries etc, but also some other 'college essentials.'
Including this t-shirt. Which irritated me more than it should have
done.*
When I sat and thought a
bit about this, I realised that the irritation is part of something much
broader: I get very irritated at the suggestion that academia (and by
extension, intellectual pursuits) are at one end of a spectrum. Woman
things (this can be make-up, an interest in clothing, a liking
of popular or selfies) are the other end of that spectrum. By misfortune
of being academically-inclined, while also being a woman, we must
choose. We must choose EITHER selfies OR books. Each choice we make
takes us one step closer to the end of the spectrum, and comes at the
cost of the other: the only way to read more books is to take fewer
selfies.
And, of
course, this irritation is partly personal. My own approach to beauty work, popular
culture and self-image could occupy an entirely separate (very boring)
blog post.** But I'm not annoyed by this shirt because I feel personally
victimised by it. I'm annoyed by this shirt because it's an example
of the dichotomy I've just described. And this toxic dichotomy matters in an academic
context because it's part of the way that academic authority is
constructed (and invested) in certain types of people. If you haven't
already read it, Rachel Moss
sparked a discussion a while back that made this clear: academic
authority exists in certain types of bodies - namely suitably masculine,
white, able-bodied bodies.
So
when we code 'feminine' things (an interest in appearance, popular
culture, style, bright colours) as in direct opposition to the 'proper'
world of academia (research, seriousness, high culture) we're directly
supporting the gendering of academia as [white, hetereosexual,
able-bodied] male. And this matters because academia is (like most
institutions) rife with inequality.***
And,
ok. I get it: for those of us just coming into this game, we want
acceptance. We don't know how to be academics: there are no rules. We
all feel like frauds and we all want to navigate those feelings and no
longer feel like impostors. And so long as academia remains coded
masculine and remains male-dominated, perhaps de-emphasising the aspects
of ourselves that are coded as 'woman' means we feel like we're gaining
more purchase a the system which is still coded 'man'. And perhaps
that's a confidence boost that can help individuals navigate a very
insecurity-inducing environment. I understand that desire.
But
this confidence-boost is shallow, because it isn't based on the quality
of your work. What's more, these actions have no long-term
material value. For example no woman is ever going to be favoured for promotion or publication purely on the basis that
she's never been seen wearing eyeliner. Accepting the dichotomy won't
challenge inequality, it just allows inequality to perpetuate.
I
feel grateful that the new platforms and online spaces researchers
inhabit are challenging this dichotomy. The state of women in the
academy is widely researched and disseminated. Alongside the discussions
outlined above, the growth in researchers using blogs to talk about the
rest of their life alongside their research may help break down this
dichotomy. One recent exciting) Sartorial Science
(run by Sophie Powell and Dr. Sam Illingworth) invites researchers to submit
photographs of what they're wearing alongside a description of their
research are.
These individual conversations (and our own individual efforts) have to exist alongside bigger institutional change. And I'm confident that the academy (like most institutions) will become more equal in time. In the meantime, I'll get to work on designing my 'MORE BOOKS MORE SELFIES' t-shirt.
--------
* Not least of all because of the irony of a pseudo-intellectual shirt making a grammatical error.
**Put
short, it's complex: I often wear make-up; I rarely shave my legs; I
watch RuPaul's Drag Race and listen to Bach; I rarely take selfies. None
of these individual things matter so much apart from one characteristic
that they share: none of these preferences interfere with my research.
*** Melissa Terras'
blog about the representation of academics in children's books has a
good round-up of some of the disparities in gender balance across
academia. I'm currently looking for more resources on other inequalities in academia.
No comments:
Post a Comment