2 Sexism and Gender Stereotypes

Home , Androcentrism, Sexism, Stereotype

2.1 Sexism versus stereotyping At first sight, the concepts of sexism and of stereotype/stereotpying may not seem (strictly) related since sexism defines a form of discrimination and stereotype/stereotyping is simply a simplified vision that we tend to have or form about certain people, communities and situations in our surroundings. However, on closer inspection, we discover that they do share some common ground in that they are the effect of a mental process of categorisation. On the one hand, there is Lledó Cunill’s (1996, 2004) definition of sexism and, on the other hand, there are both Lillhannus’s (2002) and Dyer’s (2002) defi- nitions of stereotype, which may help us to understand the differences and similarities between these two concepts. Lledó Cunill (1996, 2004) makes a distinction between androcentrism and sexism, stating that the androcentrism is a perspective whereas sexism is about attitudes. Paraphrasing Lledó Cunnill’s own words, androcentrism is a given and partial vision of the world that presents the goals reached by hu- mankind as if these were achievements solely of men.1 This vision deter- mines certain forms of language usage that tend to make women invisible. According to Lledó Cunill, androcentrism produces sexism in the form of contempt for what women are and do. This contempt takes shape through a set of practices that contribute to keeping women in subordinate positions. Therefore, Lledó Cunill argues that if a sentence or a text sounds sexist, this is not because of the language itself, but rather because of the minds and wills of language users. By contrast, Lillhannus (2002: 4) considers stereotypes “a broader phe- nomenon than prejudice but similar to categorising and generalising when the objects are human beings” and interprets the process of stereotyping as “a necessary tool for the mind in processing and interpreting reality”. This statement shows that Lillhannus does not consider the notion of stereotype dangerous and reprehensible a priori because it simply reflects people’s views of reality connected to emotional, social and cultural factors. However, Lillhannus (2002: 5) recognises that “it is when these images become locked and too emotionally charged that problems arise”. Along these lines comes the observation from Dyer (2002: 12), who considers that “it is not stereotypes, as an aspect of human thought and representation, that are wrong, but who controls and defines them, what interests they serve”. Dyer proceeds by identifying an ‘effective function’ of stereotypes residing in “the way they invoke a consensus. […] The stereotype is taken to express a general agreement about social group, as if the agreement arose before, and independently of, the stereotype.” (Dyer 2002: 14). In this agreement, we can see a link with the ‘necessity’ put forward by Lillhannus in the sense that looking for social Audiovisual translation through a gender lens consensus is a need inherent in all individuals. Stereotypes help to create such consensus although they often result in projecting a simplistic image of reality and, therefore, tend to take on pejorative connotations. I personally share all these considerations, but I see stereotyping as more than ‘a necessary tool’ and would define it as an ingrained tendency to interpret reality, which may result in derogatory or, more rarely, in ironic (and therefore friendlier) typifications of social groups.2 This can be applied, for example, to the revaluation of ‘queerness’ mentioned in chapter 1. The LGBT community has ironically reappropriated the stereotypical images that – through visual and verbal language – tend(ed) to typify its members negatively, and in so doing, the LGBT community has turned those very stereotypes into the flag of its resistance. It is Lledó Cunill’s and Lillhannus’s emphasis on the derogatory inten- tions concealed beyond words and patterns of behaviour that has urged me to relate the concepts of sexism and stereotype/stereotyping. Following Lledó Cunill’s statement that androcentrism produces sexism, I would suggest that sexism breeds stereotypes. In turn, stereotypes may easily result in false as- sumptions and generalisations that provide a distorted image of what women (and men too for that matter) are able to do, of the roles that they have to ful- fil, of the professional posts that they can hold and of the goals that they may achieve.

2.2 Sexism It is important to bear in mind the distinction between androcentrism and sexism so as to appreciate the dangerous implications that a biased perspective may have on everyday life attitudes. According to the Encyclopedia of Femi- nist Theories edited by Code (2000), androcentrism refers to

entrenched practices that base theory and practice on men’s experiences masquer- ading as ‘human’ experiences and counting as unquestioned sources of knowledge ‘in general’. Androcentrism permeates ideals of reason and rationality defined by exclusion of the ‘feminine’ […] women’s experiences and concerns are simply invisible (p. 20).

Sexism is defined as

social arrangements, policies, language, and practices enacted by men or women that express a systematic, often institutionalised belief that men are superior, women inferior. […] Sexist practices range from the seemingly simple, such as referring to women as ‘girls’, or treating women as delicate or physically/mentally incapable to the larger and more complex, such as discounting a woman’s refusal of sexual activity with assertions that ‘no’ does not mean ‘no’, to workplace attitudes and policies that extend oppression into women’s working lives by confining them to female-designated jobs on grounds only of their sex, to restricting women’s/girls’ participation in sport (p. 441).