Clayton Russo

Writing 1

Exploratory Essay

Clayton Russo

Writing 1

Gendered Discourse
Its something the majority of us participate in on a daily basis. Perhaps the reason lies in actual hatred towards the feminine. Maybe the answer is a fear of the feminine Other, and that phobia leads to a violent lash-out. For the most part however, the average person uses gendered language simply because its become a habit in modern society. Obvious examples include the misogynist lyrics of rap music, lower salaries for women than men, the objectification of the female body in pornography, etc. Smaller examples are less apparent, such as the use of certain words: huMan, MANkind, manned spaceflight, etc. These uses of patriarchal language allow for larger examples to be legitimized because sexism is not just a state of mind individuals have, but a large part of our cultural ideology. The above examples of uses of gendered language are instances that could be argued unethical, and something we should have the decency as human beings reject. However if an entire society can become numb to the marginalization of feminism, what does this mean in terms of larger scale impacts? Karen Warren and Duane Cady discuss in their book Feminism and Peace: Seeing Connections, that the numbing effect to patriarchy is specifically what make its effects so deadly. The examples they use include rape, sexual harassment, and spouse beating, as actions that are for the most part best left up to families to work out, and occur thousands of times a day on a global scale. Warren and Cady also discuss the impact this mindset has on the environment. The mentality that MAN has the right to dominate its surroundings is used as a justification for environmental destruction, such as within the oil and coal industries. This inherently violent paradigm is leaving its consequences, and events like climate change and biodiversity loss are becoming the norm. One of the obvious counter-arguments to this thesis is showing the inevitability of this mindset. Gendered language occurs on such a massive scale it would take a global transition perhaps with some major phenomena to eliminate patriarchal elements from society. Clearly we have survived this long and if anything feminism has a higher place in society than it did a hundred years ago. The alternative to

Clayton Russo

Writing 1

patriarchal thinking is unknown however, and could have negative consequences far worse than the status quo. Matthew Roskoski and Joe Peabody argue in their book A Linguistic and Philosophical Critique of Language Arguments that challenging hegemonic uses of discourse directly will simply drive its effects underground, similar to the extreme racism felt in the slums of cities such as Chicago and New York. Despite the debate over the method for challenging gendered discourse or what the status quos approach to the issue should be, it is an issue affecting each and every one of us.

Clayton Russo

Writing 1

Sources
Warren, Karen, and Duane L. Cady. Bringing Peace Home: Feminism, Violence, and Nature. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1996. Print.

Roskoski, Matthew, and Joe Peabody. "A Linguistic and Philosophical Critique of Language Arguments." DebateCentral.com. N.p., 1991. Web. 10 Feb. 2013. <http://debate.uvm.edu/Library/DebateTheoryLibrary/Roskoski&Peabody-LangCritiques>.

Clayton Russo

Writing 1

Space
With the Obama Administrations cancelling of the NASA space program, the US government has declined from the global space leader to only focusing on small R&D programs. Conquering the unknown aspects of the universe is now a job for the private sector. Many argue this was a foolish move, and that countries such as China and Russia will take advantage of the leadership gap. Others think in harsh economic times it is ludicrous to waste money on space when unemployment is exponentially high. Personally, after debating the space exploration topic for a year in high school debate, I fell inclined to lean towards the latters view. My reasoning focuses not so much on the tradeoff between space programs and economic policy, but rather the macro impacts of space development. Bruce Gagnon, a member of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, writes in his article "Space Exploration and Exploitation: What kind of seed will we take from Earth?" that the large increase in rocket launches in a space centered nation would have massive environmental consequences, such as fuel pollution, and production of resources used as capital for space missions. Also, the possibility of disease or bacteria in space that scientists are unfamiliar with existing could threaten life on earth if space travelers bring it back. Disease and environmental destruction serve however as a pro-space argument as well. From a terrestrial perspective, disease and environmental destruction are already running rampant. Climate change is moving at an accelerated rate and new diseases are springing up in developing countries and being transported globally via globalization. Along with overpopulation, many believe that the only way to truly ensure the survival of the human race is to get off the rock. Putting all of our eggs in one basket, or planet, is a risky game to play, and a backup colony will be necessary in the face of some catastrophic event. As the issue stands however, it wont be the US government making the calls anymore in terms of mans relation with space.

Clayton Russo

Writing 1

Sources
Gagnon, Bruce. "Global Network - Space Exploration and Exploitation." Global Network - Space Exploration and Exploitation. Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, 1999. Web. 10 Feb. 2013. <http://www.space4peace.org/articles/scandm.htm>.