A few weeks ago at the end of class someone question whether or not the use of a gendered pronoun in an official document makes that big of a difference. As a proud modern feminist and strong supporter of the LGBTQ+ community I reacted very negatively to this statement. "Of course it matters! How could it not?" I questioned. However, I couldn't come up with a strong enough reason as to why it matters until our class discussion on the logistic map. This mathematical system of mapping shows how a simply non-linear dynamical equation can create complex and chaotic behavior. The formula is as follows:
x(n+1) = r*x(n)*(1 - x(n))
As the r increases the equation follows certain patterns. When 0 < r < 1 the equation eventually reaches 0. For 1 < r < 2, the equation approaches (r - 1) / r. For 2 < r < 3 the system will oscillate and then approach (r - 1) / r. For r > ~3 (with the exception of certain islands of stability), the equation will exhibit chaotic behavior. For more information on this please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logistic_map.
Before discussing the relation between the logistic map and gender, I think it is necessary to explain what I mean by gender pronouns. This video does (what I think to be) a good job discussing gender pronouns from a linguistic sense and prefacing a discussion of their impacts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46ehrFk-gLk.
So, I propose that r is the occurrence of gendered-pronouns for negatively impacted individuals and the pattern exhibited is the emotional response of the individual. If the individual rarely hears the wrong pronouns their r-value exists between 0 and 1. They can shrug off the comments and continue. Once the pronouns become more and more common, the individual reaches a point where they are dramatically effecedt, but this point will not come for a while so their r is still between 1 and 2. If they hear a lot of these pronouns or the instances they hear these words trigger the individual then their r has come between 2 and 3 and they quickly reach a point of dramatic emotional responses, typically these are not healthy. Finally, if the individual hears too many of these pronouns then they reach into the chaotic behavior range.
So, an individual has chaotic emotional response. What does that mean on an substantial basis? Since chaos is the sensitivity and culmination of initial conditions. This is often why 11% of the engineering field consists of women. If every engineer is a he then why try and break into a field that will be nothing but a battle? This is why women are treated as lesser people than men. If the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that only 'he' will be safe, then is there protection for women? This is why one half of transgender youth attempt suicide. Why be a part of a world where no one acknowledges your core identity?
Yes, a pronoun here and there does not make that big of a difference. They can be shrugged off and ignored with little effects. But, when academia only pertains to males and each official document only uses 'he' and no one will respect you enough to use what you prefer then we start to have problems. It's not just a pronoun. It's a view of society that I believe needs to change before it becomes too chaotic.
Wow, I love the connection you made between pronoun use and the logistic map! While I grasped the concept of the logistic map in relation to birth and death, I never would have thought to connect the idea to feminism. After reading your argument, the connection between the logistic map and numerous other controversial questions, and even what may seem like trivial day to day matter such as fights with siblings or parents, when undergone too many times, can lead to chaos becomes very clear. I'm not sure if the logistic map covered this, or if I simply forgot it over the weeks, but is it possible for at any point the "chaotic pattern of stretching and folding" to move in reverse? We learn in chemistry that entropy, or chaos, can only be created, not destroyed. If this is the case then, once the use of the masculine pronoun as taken over the multitude of official documents, at what point is it too late to enact a different use of pronoun. And what effect may this have on future generations? Will we move back in time in the sense of women's rights, and if so, how far?
ReplyDeleteAlex, I don't think it is ever too late to change. Tom Scott in the YouTube video on Gender Neutral Pronouns mentioned that in Old English used grammatical gender (e.g., the "el" and "la" in Spanish). If that could be changed, I think that as a society, with effort, we should be able to stop using "he" in our documents and speech and come up with a better alternative.
ReplyDeleteSean, I would be interested to hear what you had to say about Tom Scott's suggestion of the term "they" to describe people. I like that it does not involve a new word being added to our language, but at the same time I find it ambiguous. Take the phrase "They are over there", would you expect to find one person or ten? I understand that this is an extreme case, but the term "they" reminds me of Ayn Rand's novella "Anthem." In this work the only pronouns used are plural (e.g., "they" and "our") and people lose their sense of individuality, forgetting the word "I".