GENDER BIAS IN EDUCATION: PERCEPTIONS OF MASCULINITY AND FEMININITY

Dr.Piku Chowdhury

Abstract


In the twenty-first century, increasing numbers of girls and women are moving into intellectual and occupational spheres traditionally seen to be masculine (Francis 2000). These changes involve the performance of new forms of femininity, a distancing from variants traditionally perceived as normative and the adoption of qualities previously viewed as masculine. Yet this new reinvented femininity is just as regulated as previous forms of femininity. Girls and women are clearly paying a price for their success, as women develop illnesses of stress previously only seen in men, and various obsessive-compulsive disorders continue to grow among female students (Walkerdine et al. 2001). The downside of female 'success' is apparent in the double and sometimes triple shift of many female academicians juggling work, child care and further study, while younger female students are caught up in a different juggling act between high academic achievements and positioning themselves as attractive and desirable to male peers. This paper remains a humble attempt at exploring the reason behind a colossal loss of valuable national intellectual resources in the higher education sector and suggest a new prespective with the prevalent social system in mind.

Keywords


Academician, higher education, gender, society

Full Text:

PDF

References


i. Acker, S. and Feurverger, G. (1997) Doing good and feeling bad: the work of women university teachers,Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3): 401–22.

ii. Ainley, P. (1998) Towards a learning or a certified society? Contradictions in the New Labour modernisation of lifelong learning,Journal of Education Policy, 13(4): 559–73.

iii. Allatt, P. (1993) Becoming privileged: the role of family processes, in I. Bates and G. Riseborough (eds)Youth and Inequality. Buckingham: Open University Press

iv. Blackmore, J. (1999)Troubling Women: Feminism, Leadership and Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.

v. Butler, J. (1990)Gender Trouble. New York: Routledge.

vi. Butler, J. (1993)Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of 'Sex'. London: Routledge.

vii. Connell, R.W. (1987)Gender and Power. London: Routledge.

viii. Connell, R.W. (1989) Cool guys, swots and wimps: the interplay of masculinity and education,Oxford Review of Education, 15(3): 291–303.

ix. Kenway, J. and Willis, S. (1998)Answering Back. London: Routledge.

x. Walkerdine, V. (1989)Counting Girls Out. London: Virago.

xi. Blackmore, J. (1999)Troubling Women: Feminism, Leadership and Educational Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.

xii. Blackmore, J. and Kenway, J. (eds) (1993)Gender Matters in Educational Administration and Policy: A Feminist Introduction. London: Falmer.

xiii. Reay, D. (1997) The double bind of the working class feminist academic: the success of failure or the failure of success? in P. Mahony and C. Zmroczek (eds)Class Matters: Working Class Women's perspectives on Social Class. London: Taylor & Francis.

xiv. Reay, D. (1998)Class Work: Mothers' Involvement in their Children's Schooling. London: UCL Press.

xv. Tseelon, E. (1995)The Masque of Femininity. London: Sage.

xvi. Doane, M. (1988) Masquerade reconsidered: further thoughts on the female spectator, Discourse: Journal for Theoretical Studies in Media and Culture, 11: 42–54.

xvii. Marshall, J. (1984)Women Managers: Travellers in a Male World. Chichester: Wiley.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2021 INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH JOURNAL