Communities of Practice at Work: Gender,Facework and the Power of Habitus at an All-Female Police Station and a Feminist Crisis Intervention Center in Brazil
Restricted accessOtherFirst published online July, 2003
Communities of Practice at Work: Gender,Facework and the Power of Habitus at an All-Female Police Station and a Feminist Crisis Intervention Center in Brazil
This article investigates discursive practices and their relations to gender, facework and workplace in two all-female institutions that address violence against women in Brazil. By investigating 26 audio-taped interactions with victims of domestic violence at an all-female police station and a feminist activist crisis intervention center, this study contributes to the understanding of intragender differences. The findings suggest that gender does not predict interactional patterns; instead these interactional patterns are best understood as reflecting the gendered communities of practice from which the professionals are drawn. Police officers attend less to the victims' needs by providing minimal feedback when the victims report their problems. They are four times more likely than feminists to provide non-responses to the victims' turns, as well as four times more likely to change topics in their responses to the victims' turns. The linguistic and ethnographic findings suggest that the more cooperative strategies used by the feminists are not as `valuable' for police officers in the symbolic market of their habitus. In the police system, a more affiliative way of relating to the female clientele seems to work against the female police officers and their aims, by reifying the essentialist ideology that affiliative interactions are `natural' to women, or that is all females can offer in the police system.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Azevedo, M.A. (1985) Mulheres Espancadas: A Violência Denunciada. São Paulo, Brazil: Cortez .
2.
Bayraktaroglu, A. (1991) `Politeness and Interactional Imbalance' , International Journal of the Sociology of Language92: 5-34 .
3.
Bem, S.L. (1993) The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Equality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
4.
Bergvall, V.L. (1999) `Toward a Comprehensive Theory of Language and Gender' , Language in Society28: 273-293 .
5.
Bing, J.M. and Bergvall, V.L. (1996) “The Question of Questions: Beyond Binary Thinking', in V.L. Bergvall, J.M. Bing and A. Freed (eds) Rethinking Language and Gender Research, pp. 1-30. New York: Longman .
6.
Bourdieu, P. (1977) `The Economics of Linguistic Exchanges' , Social Science Information16: 645-668 .
7.
Bourdieu, P. (1991) Language and Symbolic Power (trans. G. Raymond and M. Adamson). Cambridge: Polity Press .
8.
Brown, P. and Levinson, S.C. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
9.
Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (1995) `Introduction: Twenty Years after Language and Woman's Place', in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds) Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, pp. 1-24. New York: Routledge .
10.
Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge .
11.
Chauí, M. (1984) `Participando do Debate Sobre Mulher e Violência', in M. Chauí, M.C. Paoli and P. Montero SOS-Mulher (eds) Perpspectivas Antropológicas da Mulher 4, pp. 23-62. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Zahar Editores .
12.
Clark, H.H. and Schaefer, E.F. (1989) `Contributing to Discourse' , Cognitive Science13: 259-294 .
13.
Crawford, M. (1995) Talking Difference. London: Sage .
14.
Drew, P. and Heritage, J. (1992) `Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction', in P. Drew and J. Heritage (eds) Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, pp. 3-65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
15.
Du Bois, J.W., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Paolino, D. and Cumming, S. (eds) (1992) Discourse Transcription. Santa Barbara, CA: University of Santa Barbara .
16.
Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992) `Think Practically and Look Locally: Language and Gender as Community-Based Practice' , Annual Review of Anthropology21: 461-490 .
17.
Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1995) `Constructing Meaning, Constructing Selves: Snapshots of Language, Gender, and Class from Belten High', in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds) Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, pp. 469-507. New York: Routledge .
18.
Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1999) `New Generalizations and Explanations in Language and Gender Research' , Language in Society28: 185-201 .
19.
Freed, A. (1992) `We Understand Perfectly: A Critique of Tannen's View of Cross-Sex Communication', in K. Hall, M. Bucholz and B. Moonwoman (eds) Locating Power: Proceedings of the Second Berkeley Women and Language Conference, pp. 144-152. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group .
20.
Gal, S. (1995) `Language, Gender, and Power: An Anthropological Review', in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds) Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self, pp. 169-182. New York: Routledge .
21.
Goffman, E. (1955) `On Face-Work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction' , Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes18: 213-231 .
22.
Gumperz, J.J. (1982) Discourse Strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press .
23.
Hautzinger, S. (1997) ` “Calling a State a State”: Feminist Politics and the Policing of Violence Against Women in Brazil' , Feminist Issues, 15(1-2): 3-30 .
24.
Hautzinger, S. (1998) `Machos and Policewomen, Battered Women and Anti-Victims: Combating Violence Against Women in Brazil', unpublished PhD dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
25.
Henley, N. and Kramarae, C. (1991) `Miscommunication, Power, and Gender', in N. Coupland, J.M. Wiemann and H. Giles (eds) `Miscommunication' and Problematic Talk, pp. 18-43. Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
26.
Heritage, J. (1997) `Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analysing Data', in D. Silverman (ed.) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, pp. 161-182. London: Sage .
27.
Holmes, J. (1995) Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman .
28.
Holmes, J. and Stubbe, M. (1997) `Good Listeners: Gender Differences in New Zealand Conversation' , Women and Language20(2): 7-14 .
29.
Jespersen, O. (1922) `The Woman', in O. Jespersen (ed.) Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin, pp. 237-254. London: Allen and Unwin .
30.
Lakoff, R. (1975) Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper and Row .
31.
Lakoff, R. (1995) `Cries and Whispers', in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds) Gender Articulated, pp. 25-50. New York: Routledge .
32.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press .
33.
Lerner, G.H. and Takagi, T. (1999) `On the Place of Linguistic Resources in the Organization of Talk-in-Interaction: A Co-Investigation of English and Japanese Grammatical Practices' , Journal of Pragmatics31(1): 49-75 .
34.
Levinson, S.C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
35.
Matoesian, G.M. (1993) Reproducing Rape: Domination Through Talk in the Courtroom. Cambridge: Polity Press .
36.
McElhinny, B.S. (1993) `We All Wear Blue: Language, Gender and Police Work', unpublished PhD, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
37.
Mendoza-Denton, N. (1995) `Pregnant Pauses', in K. Hall and M. Bucholtz (eds) Gender Articulated, pp. 51-66. New York: Routledge .
38.
Murray, K. (1990) Life as Fiction. Victoria, Australia: University of Melbourne .
39.
Nabucco, A. (1989, April 30) `Aumentam os casos de estupro em um quadro geral de violência familiar', Diário Popular, pp. 12-13.
40.
Nelson, S.E. (1996) `Constructing and Negotiating Gender in Women's Police Stations in Brazil' , Latin American Perspectives23, no. 1(88): 131-148 .
41.
Nelson, S.E. (1997) `Policing Women: Race, Class and Power in the Women's Police Stations of Brazil', unpublished PhD, University of Washington, Washington.
42.
Ostermann, A.C. (2000) `Reifying and Defying Sisterhood: Communities of Practice at Work at an All-Female Police Station and a Feminist Crisis Intervention Center in Brazil', unpublished PhD, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
43.
Ostermann, A.C. (2002) `A Ordem Interacional: A Organização do Fechamento de Interações entre Profissionais e Clientes em Instituições de Combate à Violência Contra a Mulher', ALFA: Revista de Lingüística 46-46.
44.
Ostermann, A.C. (2003) `Localizing Power and Solidarity: Pronoun Alternation at an All-Female Police Station and a Feminist Crisis Intervention Center in Brazil' , Language in Society32(3): 351-381 .
45.
Paoli, M.C. (1984) `Mulheres: Lugar, Imagem, Movimento', in M. Chauí, M.C. Paoli and P. Montero SOS-Mulher (eds) Perspectivas Antropológicas da Mulher 4, pp. 63-100. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Zahar Editores .
46.
Pomerantz, A. and Fehr, B.J. (1997) `Conversation Analysis: An Approach to the Study of Social Action as Sense Making Practices', in T. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction, pp. 64-91. London: Sage .
47.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. and Jefferson, G. (1974) `A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation' , Language, 50(4): 696-735 .
48.
Schegloff, E.A. (1981) `Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Uses of “uhuh” and Other Things that Come between the Sentences', in D. Tannen (ed.) Analyzing Discourse: Talk and Text, pp. 71-93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press .
49.
Schegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G. and Sacks, H. (1977) `The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation' , Language: Journal of the Linguistic Society of America53: 361-382 .
50.
Scollon, R. and Scollon, S.W. (1995) Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell .
51.
Sorj, B. and Montero, P. (1984) `SOS-Mulher e a Luta Contra a Violência', in M. Chauí, M.C. Paoli and P.M. SOS-Mulher (eds) Perspectivas Antropológicas da Mulher 4, pp. 101-108. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Zahar Editores .
52.
Station, E. (1989, November) `Partners Against the Crime: Brazil's Police Work with Women to Fight Domestic Violence' , Ms.18: 69-70 .
53.
Stokoe, E.H. (1998) `Talking about Gender: The Conversational Construction of Gender Categories in Academic Discourse' , Discourse & Society9: 217-240 .
54.
Tannen, D. (1990) You Just Don't Understand. New York: Bantam Books .
55.
Thorne, B. (1993) Gender Play: Girls and Boys at School. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press .
56.
Tracy, K. (1990) “The Many Faces of Facework', in H. Giles and W.P. Robinson (eds) Handbook of Language and Social Psychology, pp. 209-226. Chichester: Wiley .
57.
Tracy, K. and Tracy, S. (1998) `Rudeness at 911: Reconceptualizing Face and Face Attack' , Human Communication Research25: 225-251 .
58.
West, C. (1994) `Rethinking Sex Differences in Conversational Topics: It's Not What They Say but How They Say It', in C. Roman, S. Juhasz and C. Miller (eds) The Women and Language Debate, pp. 363-382. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press .
59.
West, C. and Zimmerman, D.H. (1983) `Small Insults: A Study of Interruptions in Cross-Sex Conversations Between Unacquainted Persons', in B. Thorne, C. Kramarae and N. Henley (eds) Language, Gender and Society, pp. 103-117. Rowley, MA: Newbury House .
