Monday, September 14, 2009

desigualdade de gênero pela última vez - last post on gender inequality

andei escrevendo aqui no parede sobre desigualdade de gênero, sobre a importância de discutir isso com as alunas de arquitetura, que são não apenas maioria numérica como também invariavelmente melhores ultimamente.


como pai de duas meninas me preocupa muito observar que a sociedade (eu, você, nós todos) incentivamos os meninos a serem sempre vocais e visíveis e subliminarmente incentivamos as meninas a não serem tão vocais nem tão visíveis.


mas a julgar pela caixa de comentários desse blog que registrou 27 colocações masculinas contra 2 femininas nos últimos dois posts, há de se concluir que:


ou o assunto é absolutamente desinteressante para as leitoras do sexo feminino,


ou a conformidade é tanta que desestimula até comentários num blog menor.


de qualquer forma continuo inquieto



I have been writing here about gender inequality and the importance of discussing this with female students of architecture whom are not only the numerical majority but invariably the best in class lately.


as a father of two girls it worries me that society (me, you, we all) stimulates the boys to be always vocal and visible and subconsciously tells the girls to be not so vocal and not so visible.


but judging from the commentaries in this blog which registered 27 masculine entries and only 2 feminine ones in last the two weeks, I might conclude that:


the subject is absolutely uninteresting for the female readers


or the level of conformity is such that it discourages them from even commenting in a minor blog.


either way I am still uneasy

12 comments:

KSH said...

Very interesting, Fernando.

Only 2 comments from female readers of your blog? Something to chew on for sure. I am also quite taken by your concluding remark on the possible degree of conformity among women in current times.

Here is something that comes to my mind. When the feminist movement started, a large majority of feminists were bra-burners. They called for equality by staging, "women are equal to men." The feminism of today continues that strife, but their present-day mantra is "women are different from men and the society needs to recognize this difference." The underlying fight for social justice remains, but the world-view has changed over time. Women no longer want to be pressured into being like men or taking on roles like them. They wish to be seen as bringing distinct energies, perspectives, thoughts or what have you to the table.

I see our present time as a phase of transition. Women are not silent. They are at work. They are crafting their argument/practice around the notion of difference. They are busy building a body of work that can help them define themselves and show men that they are equal to them not because they can do things that men expect them to do, but because they can outperform them on several fronts, otherwise unacknowledged and/or less documented.

Which brings us back to the idea of visibility, that is, visibility is the absence of what is not given thought. Women of today and tomorrow are perhaps in the kitchen (read studios/ offices/ academia etc.), making that "food-for-thought." It's time for men to acquire a new taste!

Kush

KSH said...

On a continuing note, I feel IF women are not participating because they know, "its time for men to acquire a new taste," then this defines the other extreme, which is equally troublesome.

Building up on Habermas, Nancy Fraser suggested the politics of "subaltern counterpublics," which is:

1. Recognize that there are several publics (in this case that men and women are different), and

2. Recognize the need to have continued conversations between several publics (in this case, between men and women.) It is not enough to argue that if men have defined themselves for generations, it is time for women to do the same. We must create a space of "social communication " as suggested by Habermas. It is this, that helps define a progressive society: one that continues to make visible the difference.

What do you say, Fernando?

Albarbour said...

Kush, you said it all.

Fernando L Lara said...

Kush,

let me see if I get it. Your main point is that the problem resides on men eyes? We (men) are not able to see and therefore it becomes invisible? So it should all change once we fix our myopia?

KSH said...

Hmm. Let me try.

I think the problem is manifold.

Scenario 1: Women are complacent or non-committal or simply conditioned to conform, thanks to institutionalized social norms. This is worrisome because as you rightly pointed out, it discourages them from participating or commenting in social spaces.

Conclusion 1: We need to revisit the dominant models of architectural practice (dominant = traditionally defined by men.)

Scenario 2: Women are confident and aware that they no longer need the approval of men, in other words, be at the receiving end of recognition from men. They have withdrawn themselves by *choice*. This is what I meant by suggesting that women are at work and if at all, it is for men to acquire a new taste. Although hypothetical, I feel that this defines yet another extreme: Women are silent not because they are discouraged but because a. they feel that voicing opinion is so-1970s. or b. they are being aggressive in passivity or c. they have sheltered themselves in silos and feel there's no need to come out of these silos. Also, because their perception is that these silos/cocoons are vibrant and safe.

Conclusion 2: Women have created new model/s of architectural practice of, for and by themselves.

Ideal Scenario: My argument is that any revisiting of existing models needs for:
a. Man to shed his ego and fix his myopia.
b. Women to stop being passive or passive-aggressive or strongly aggressive.
c. All genders and sexualities need to recognize the merits of a shared conversation or discourse which is not just internal. The sub-cultures can continue to have internal talks but the silos need to break loose and seek connections. All of us need to participate in spaces/practices to help make them more diverse and inclusive.

Conclusion 3: A shift in perspective is needed to elevate the overall profession of architecture lest we continue to fight internally and fail to achieve a well respected and valued role in our society.

It is this perspectival shift that will make visible all kinds of practices and actors in architecture.

Does this make sense?

Kush

Marcele Silveira said...

Oi Fernando. Venho acompanhando esse debate interessantíssimo sobre a desigualdade de gêneros. Por que não falei nada? Talvez por não saber o que dizer... Talvez por me encaixar perfeitamente no que a Ana Paula e Mário do Val dizem. Talvez por ser mais uma a aceitar uma condição escolhida por mim, em prezar a família em prol da profissão. Mas me proponho a entrar na roda e colocar meu ponto de vista:
Como professora de projeto, ouso palpitar que, sim, as mulheres são mais focadas e mais estudiosas. Mas os homens, generalizando, são mais soltos, tem menos vergonha de ousar e mostrar suas idéias. Essa facilidade de se expressar, seja com palavras ou grandes projetos, creio eu, colabora para a visibilidade no mercado.

Fernando L Lara said...

Marcele,

cabe então trabalhar em duas frentes: aprimorar o olhar para aprender a reconhecer qualidade em ações menos "visíveis" e incentivar as meninas a mostrar mais seu trabalho (sem perder as qualidades femininas deste).

concorda?

carlos said...

Fernando, quais são as "qualidades femininas" de um trabalho? Eu não entendo qdo falam que um trabalho pode ser diferente se feito por homem ou por mulher. Uma cirurgiã vai operar alguém de forma "feminina"? ou vai ser esperado dela que seja mais "maternal" com os pacientes? (note bem o "esperado").

MARINA said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MARINA said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MARINA said...

Fora os pontos levantados acima, acho que vale questionar a visão da sociedade com relação a nós arquitetos. Acredito que vivemos em uma sociedade, que ainda não se libertou totalmente dos ideais machistas e patriarcais.
Me formei há somente dois anos, e ainda estou em processo de inserção no mercado de trabalho. Pensando no tema em questão, faço uma comparação entre os colegas que se formaram comigo, e observo que as mulheres começam a trabalhar fazendo uma reforna na casa da tia, dando consultoria na compra de móveis da vizinha...etc.
Já os meninos, não tem muita credibilidade para fazer este tipo de trabalho, então começam buscando emprego em empresas relacionadas à arquitetura e à construção, e os que se arriscam a montar um escritório, correm atrás de concursos, pois a tia prefere a sobrinha dando palpite na decoração da sua casa do que o sobrinho!
Talvez esta forma diferenciada entre os sexos, imposta pela sociedade, de inserção no mercado de trabalho, contribua para que as mulheres dominem o mercado da arquitetura de interiores e os homens o dos grandes projetos (que geram maior reconhecimento).

Fernando L Lara said...

Carlos,

tai uma pergunta dificil: quais seriam as qualidades ditas "femininas" ? Na literatura feminista (Groat, Ahrentzen, Colomina, Lavin) as mulheres teriam mais facilidade em entender o ponto de vista do "outro" e portanto mais sucesso trabalhando em equipe. Como isso de reflete na espacialidade? Nao sei ao certo mas acho que a arquitetura contemporanea em que grupos substituem a autoria individual comeca ja a valorizar justamente esse tipo de abordagem.

Marina,

bem vinda ao parede. Eu acho que a diferenciacao parte do cliente sim, a pergunta eh como quebrar esse tipo de condicionamento.