40308242

Roberts, Glenda S.

English

Waseda University Repository

45グレンダ・Ｓ・ロバーツ	 Glenda S. Roberts《授業報告》Teaching “The World of Gender”　The	first	 time	I	seriously	studied	the	paradigm	of	gender	was	when	I	 was	 a	 graduate	 student	 at	 Cornell	 University’s	 Department	 of	Anthropology	 in	 the	 early	1980s.	 I	had	 the	good	 fortune	of	 taking	a	course	from	Professor	Kathryn	March,	who	at	the	time	was	a	new	faculty	member.	Professor	March	had	utilized	gender	theory	in	her	studies	of	the	Tamang	in	Nepal.	I	would	come	to	use	gender	as	a	guiding	paradigm	in	my	studies	of	Japanese	society,	 including	research	on	blue-collar	women	in	a	lingerie	factory,	senior	citizens	in	“Silver	Talent	Centers,”	men	and	women	seeking	work/life	balance	in	a	multinational	firm,	“salarywomen”	forging	new	paths	in	a	major	Japanese	corporation,	changing	norms	and	patterns	of	family	life,	and	families	in	Tokyo	and	Paris.	Professor	March’s	introduction	to	the	theory	of	gender	in	anthropology	and	sociology	was	crucial	in	all	of	these,	and	more	broadly	in	my	career.　I	am	pleased	to	have	been	given	a	Waseda	University	Teaching	Award	for	my	2021	fall	semester	course,	“The	World	of	Gender,”	as	it	confirms	that	my	style	of	 teaching	has	been	well	received	by	the	students.	 It	 is	particularly	gratifying	that	while	 I	 thought	 that	approach	was	most	effective	in	a	face-to-face	setting,	it	could	be	utilized	effectively	even	under	the	unusual	circumstances	brought	to	us	by	COVID.	I	have	to	admit,	I	was	more	than	a	bit	worried	at	the	outset	about	how	I	could	sustain	students’	attention	for	a	three-hour-long,	online,	discussion-based	course.	Perhaps	早稲田大学ジェンダー研究所紀要『ジェンダー研究21』2022年vol.12©Waseda	University	Gender	Studies	Institute46the	 fact	 that	 the	 class	was	 totally	online	and	hence	quite	a	 challenge	to	manage	made	 the	students	 feel	more	sympathetic!	Or,	perhaps	 the	importance	of	the	subject	became	even	more	clear	during	the	pandemic,	driving	the	students’	interest	even	more	than	in	previous	years.	In	recent	years,	too,	there	has	been	a	burgeoning	production	of	social-science-based	literature	on	genders,	so	the	 increased	awareness	of	diversity	in	gender	may	have	prompted	student	 interest.	 In	any	case,	 it	was	gratifying	to	know	that	the	students	gained	as	much	from	this	body	of	knowledge	as	I	have	gained.	We	had	some	robust	discussions.　This	course	is	intended	for	MA	and	PhD	students.	Most	of	the	students	are	from	the	Graduate	School	of	Asia-Pacific	Studies,	although	we	also	attract	a	 few	students	 from	other	departments	 such	as	 the	Graduate	School	 of	 International	Culture	and	Communication	（GSICCS）.	The	class	size	has	grown	larger	over	the	years.	Of	 late,	 it	was	24.	 I	always	begin	this	course	by	asking	students	what	they	think	the	word	“gender”	means,	and	how	they	distinguish	 it	 from	“sex.”	This	usually	 leads	 to	a	good	discussion,	as	different	students	have	different	 ideas	about	this	vocabulary.	We	begin	the	course	by	discussing	diversity	 in	gender,	 for	instance,	by	 looking	at	the	gender	systems	of	native	North	Americans.	We	also	add	perspectives	 from	research	on	 transsexualism	（Shapiro,	2005）	and	 intersex	（Kessler,	1998）.	Students	understand	from	this	rich	material	that	gender	is	socially	constructed,	with	diverse	meanings	across	societies.	We	then	query	such	topics	as	whether	there	is	any	basis	in	the	common	belief	that	women	have	a	“maternal”	instinct.	We	look	at	theories	that	posit	the	division	of	gender	roles	as	stemming	from	a	material	base,	through	reading	Mascia-Lees	and	Black’s	（2016）	work,	“The	Materialist	Orientation.”	At	times	I	have	added	perspectives	from	economics	as	well,	47especially	 those	of	Folbre	（1994）	who	discusses	gender	as	one	of	 the	“structures	of	constraint”	in	the	modern	world.	We	dive	into	the	gendered	implications	of	government	policy	as	well.	Other	 topics	we	discuss	 in	the	course	are	 the	socialization	for	gender	roles,	parental	accountings	of	gender	variance,	gender	and	masculinities,	and	gender	and	emotional	labor	under	capitalism.	Although	I	always	refresh	some	of	the	readings	with	newly	produced	research,	I	have	found	that	it	also	helps	to	have	some	historical	anchors,	so	that	we	can	see	how	the	field	has	developed	over	the	years.　Aside	from	there	being	a	plethora	of	interesting	readings	to	choose	from	when	designing	a	course	such	as	this,	which	makes	it	a	pleasure	to	teach,	since	the	students	easily	engage	with	the	readings,	another	necessity	of	teaching	this	or	any	other	course	is	to	allow	plenty	of	time	for	discussion.	I	 see	 the	readings	as	a	springboard	for	discussion,	not	an	endpoint	 in	themselves.	Our	diverse	students	bring	different	 interpretations	to	the	readings	I	assign	for	each	week,	so	 it	helps	everyone’s	understanding	if	these	disparate	understandings	are	voiced.	Students	learn	from	each	other	as	much	as	they	learn	from	me,	as	long	as	they	all	put	the	time	in	to	read	deeply	and	are	not	afraid	to	voice	their	opinions	and	ask	questions.	I	owe	this	teaching	style	to	Carol	Greenhouse,	my	legal	anthropology	professor	at	Cornell.	Dr.	Greenhouse	would	always	ask	us	for	our	interpretations	of	 the	readings	we	had	done.	She	did	not	 lead	 the	 class	with	her	own	interpretations.	We	came	to	class	knowing	that	we	would	be	asked,	so	we	did	a	lot	of	thinking	before	taking	our	seats!	　To	encourage	fruitful	discussions,	I	have	the	students	write	summaries	of	one	reading	for	each	week.	I	then	read	and	comment	on	these	for	the	following	week.	Furthermore,	 each	week,	a	group	of	 students	will	do	48a	presentation	of	one	reading	with	discussion	questions	to	 launch	the	conversation.	The	key	to	making	this	work	is	to	encourage	students	to	feel	that	any	question	is	valuable,	and	that	their	ideas	will	be	taken	seriously.	There	 is	no	fear	of	feeling	awkward	or	stupid	 in	my	classes,	 I	hope.	Of	course,	 some	students	 come	to	 the	 course	with	more	prior	knowledge	than	others,	and	discussion	will	be	easier	 for	them.	Other	students	do	not	have	English	as	a	native	 language,	so	communication	 itself	may	be	a	challenge,	but	I	encourage	all	students	to	voice	their	thoughts	and	be	part	of	our	mutual	production	of	meaning.	The	 fact	 that	our	student	body	at	GSAPS	is	highly	diverse	internationally	also	helps	when	it	comes	to	discussing	readings,	as	students	are	coming	from	so	many	different	cultural	backgrounds.	Students	learn	a	lot	from	each	other,	and	I,	too,	am	a	beneficiary	of	this	diversity.	For	their	final	research	papers,	students	choose	 their	own	topics,	 first	writing	a	prospectus	and	obtaining	my	feedback.	Last	year,	we	met	one	extra	session	so	that	some	students	could	present	their	papers	to	everyone	and	receive	feedback.　Gender	 is	central	 to	our	 identity,	yet	 it	 is	also	taken	for	granted	as	something	“natural”	or	even	fixed.	Through	 immersing	themselves	 in	the	rich	literature	that	takes	gender	as	a	concept	of	inquiry,	students	can	learn	of	the	wealth	of	diversity	in	gender,	how	it	 is	expressed,	how	it	 is	lived,	and	how	it	is	evolving.	In	this	way,	learning	about	gender	helps	us	to	understand	more	about	each	other,	but	also	about	ourselves.	And	that,	I	think,	 is	what	makes	teaching	this	class,	and	anthropology	in	general,	worthwhile.Works CitedKessler,	Suzanne.	1998.	Lessons from the Intersexed.	New	Brunswick,	NJ:49　Rutgers	University	Press.Folbre,	Nancy.	1994.	Who Pays for the Kids? Gender and the Structures of Constraint.	London	and	New	York:	Routledge.Mascia-Lees,	Frances	E.	and	Nancy	Johnson	Black.	2016.	“The	Materialist	Orientation.”	In	Gender and Anthropology,	edited	by	Frances	E.	Mascia-Lees	and	Nancy	Johnson	Black,	41-60.	Second	Edition,	Long	Grove,	IL:	Waveland	Press.Shapiro,	Judith.	2005.	“Transsexualism:	Reflections	on	the	Persistence	of	Gender	and	 the	Mutability	of	Sex.”	In	Same-sex Cultures and Sexualities: An Anthropological Reader,	edited	by	Jennifer	Robertson,	138-161.	Malden,	MA:	Blackwell	Publishing.

Teaching “The World of Gender”

https://waseda.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/2000840/files/GenderStudies21_12_08.pdf

Teaching “The World of Gender”

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Waseda University Repository