A L S O_ T O D A Y

The reluctant accuser
By Alexandra Robbins
When faced with quasi-assault from a friend, a young student finds neither college counselors nor handbooks have an answer

T A B L E_ T A L K

Do women's studies departments further marginalize women from mainstream academic debate? Weigh in on the purpose of gender studies in Table Talk's Education area

___________________

Check out books by Camille Paglia at BarnesandNoble.com
___________________

R E C E N T L Y

Pact with the CEO
By James C. Luh
As technology licensing programs gain more currency in American universities, universities will surely gain more American currency, but will research suffer?
(02/05/99)

Death wishes
By Daren Fonda
George Minois' exhaustive study traces the long, strange history of suicide
(02/05/99)

Stalking Kurt Vonnegut
By Dan Stern
A young writer attempts to turn his literary hero into a neighborhood
(02/03/99)

Barhopping with the Bud Girls
By James Hibberd
Salon Exclusive: After five years of hand-wringing about binge drinking, an investigation reveals just how low some beer distributors will go to saturate the college market
(02/01/99)

Think fast and lie
By Katy Shrout
One recent graduate offers advice for confused college seniors facing the end
(01/29/99)

BROWSE THE
CAMILLE PAGLIA
ARCHIVE

A S K_C A M I L L E +|+ C A M I L L E+P A G L I A
--- Online advice for the culturally disgruntled ---

Gender whores

PENNED OFF IN GILDED GHETTOS, THE SCHOLARS OF SEX MISS THE COMPLEX BIOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL STORY OF HUMAN SEXUAL NATURE.

---

Dear Camille:

I am a first-year professor of psychology. I was asked to teach a general requirement course on the psychology of gender. Now, obviously, I am well aware of what the expectations are for me in teaching this course. However, in my own reading of the empirical and not so empirical work in this area, I've become confused over the entire reason for the existence of this course! What do we mean by "the psychology of gender"? Are we saying that there is more to be understood about the individual by simply knowing whether they are male or female, and that the study on the effects of gender socialization warrants an entire course!? How do you feel about the increasing number of psychology courses offered on specific identities (e.g., psychology of gays and lesbians, blacks and women). The focus of many of these courses is to refute popular misconceptions of these groups held by the majority members of society. Fine. But why is this a psychology course?

Also, what is the difference between sex and gender? Why has gender become a preferred term over sex? Are we trying to completely refute the notion that biological differences exist between males and females?

A confused academic

Dear Confused,

Your question goes straight to the heart of the current campus chaos. Are students, at great cost to the family budget, being introduced to empirical evidence, primary texts and major art works, or are they being brainwashed by nattering nannies with a sentimental social-welfare agenda?

Psychology courses motivated by identity politics are clearly a form of propaganda that spineless administrators have not only tolerated but encouraged for public relations purposes. American higher education has drifted into a policy of appeasement: Throw money at querulous groups, and pen them off in their gilded ghettos. Women's studies programs pioneered in this blackmail in the 1970s, carving out their autocracies by threatening opponents with the odious charge of male chauvinism.

It's not clear from your letter whether your professional interests are in experimental or social psychology. Properly taught, a well-planned psychology of gender course would introduce students to the full range of historical and contemporary theories of gender, from social constructionism to biological determinism. Unfortunately, in this overpoliticized campus climate, it's unlikely that biology will get its due. Orwellian doublespeak suffuses current talk about gender. I'm sure there are responsible teachers who strive to be fair, but let's face it, most keep a prudent low profile and rarely challenge the bigwig feminist bullies and their "queer theory" allies.

Poststructuralism (in the school of Michel Foucault) has attempted with ludicrous results to deform common English usage by splitting off "sex" from "sexuality": "Sex" is the wet, gummy, organic stuff; "sexuality" comprises all of our organizing ideas about it, as dictated by the allegedly repressive post-Enlightenment medical establishment. Extreme Foucaldians (as cultist as saffron-robed Hare Krishnas dunning travelers at airports) deny that "sex" exists at all: Since language, as the overpraised linguist Ferdinand de Saussure claimed, determines both selfhood and experience, if you're not thinking about it, it ain't happenin'. Sound absurd? Mouthing absurdities gets you to the top of the elite schools these days.

N E X T_ P A G E .|. Why "gender" and not "sex"?