Scribd
Upload
9 views

Class Notes

The document discusses how academic writing and language can often exclude women's perspectives and experiences. It reflects on how women have had to learn the language of men to survive in a patriarchal culture, but men do not understand women's language. This makes women's views seen as irrational or emotional rather than serious. It also discusses how some academic disciplines focus more on institutions than individuals, further excluding marginalized groups.

Uploaded by

reha.malikasp24
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
9 views

Class Notes

The document discusses how academic writing and language can often exclude women's perspectives and experiences. It reflects on how women have had to learn the language of men to survive in a patriarchal culture, but men do not understand women's language. This makes women's views seen as irrational or emotional rather than serious. It also discusses how some academic disciplines focus more on institutions than individuals, further excluding marginalized groups.

Uploaded by

reha.malikasp24
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

I first came across Cohn’s reading in Monsoon semester 2023 for the course Foreign Policy

Analysis. I found her reflections poignant and have returned to the reading many times since. I
am especially interested in her reflections of the absence of language for talking about people’s
experiences or the violence inflicted upon people, almost as if that taints the process of critical
thinking or critical writing. Additionally, it further alienates individuals that are affected by
aforementioned processes and thus deserve representation in these spaces. How does one make
space for people in languages that don’t have words for said experiences?

This reading, to me, seems reflective of a larger issue in academia or academic writing, the
language of which is inaccessible or absent for women. Written works, interviews, and
experiences recounted by women scholars reflect this struggle.

During a panel discussion, Meryl Streep talks about how women have learnt the language of men
in order to survive in a patriarchal culture but men don’t know or understand the language of
women. As a result, women’s perspective is seen to come from a place of irrationality or
emotion (both work in tandem) and thus something that needs to be separated or removed from
‘serious’ conversations or ‘serious writing’. Men, by virtue of their language being universalised,
find their perspective already entrenched in the public or mass understandings. However, women
feel the need to provide consistent qualifiers or disclaimers and go the extra mile to fit their
beliefs into a schema of language that does not account for their identity.

Audre Lorde highlights this issue in her essay titled ‘Poetry is not a Luxury’. She speaks of how
poetry is a tool for distilling the essence of an experience without treating it as sterile word play,
which is a Eurocentric and masculine perspective to hold. Lorde talks about how institutions
dehumanise people, especially women of colour and thus do not hold space for feelings,
especially women’s feelings. “Feelings are meant to kneel to thought”, where our understanding
of thought is masculine.

This reading provided me with a lens or tool to understand my own difficulty in connecting with
certain academic disciplines. My experience with Political Science in Ashoka has felt alienating
and unfamiliar, irrespective of the texts or my continued engagement with them. Perhaps it has
something to do with some disciplines’ focus on the institution and not the individual, or the
discipline’s preference for depersonalisation via viewing things from an empirical vantage point.
I find this gap bridged via constructivist thought in IR, that highlights the importance of norms
and identities in constructing larger political institutions. It possesses tools that allow for an
explanation of women’s experiences and puts their needs at the forefront. However, I do think
the generally accepted practices of academic writing view feelings and consequently, perspective
as secondary and delegitimizing to the process of academic writing. This is harmful to academics
that come from marginalised backgrounds because the nuances of their experience are
categorised as products of passion or emotion, which they must pick apart to the comfort of the
white reader. This is an unfair and deterring burden.
I realise this reflection has much to pick apart and speaks in general terms. I acknowledge that
academia is a fluid and expansive category that possesses writings that hold space for women’s
perspectives. I, myself, do not possess the tools to critically pick apart or explain this
dissonance. Perhaps that discomfort or struggle in itself showcases the need for an expansion of
our understanding of academic writing!

You might also like