‘Next time stay in your war room and pray for your boys’ or return to your kitchen: Sexist discourses in Ghana’s 2019 National Science and Math Quiz

Abstract

This paper examines the representations of women in the discourses on the 2019 edition of Ghana’s National Science and Math Quiz. With data from online news articles and three social media outlets, the study examines stereotypical views about gender and Science/Math while exploring the relationship between language, gender, and culture. We focus on how the authors use memes, images and some linguistic strategies to instantiate certain (Ghanaian) gender norms and practices. Findings suggest that women who pursue (academic) excellence, especially in male-dominated fields like Science and Math, are usurpers who need to be kept where they ‘belong’. They are thus presented in particular stereotypical ways – homemakers, supporters, objects of sex and beauty, ‘unfit’ for science/math. Using Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis, which makes room for uncovering, contesting and reinterpreting the ‘hidden agendas’ of discourse, we also analyze nuances of the representations, some of which we (re)interpret as representations of women’s power.

Keywords

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis gender stereotypes hegemonic femininity hegemonic masculinity National Science and Math Quiz representation social media

Introduction

The internet is said to be inherently democratic, as it levels traditional distinctions of social status and creates opportunities for less powerful groups (like women) to participate on a par with more powerful groups (like men). Accordingly, it is said to ‘lead to greater gender equality, with women, as the socially, politically, and economically less powerful gender, especially likely to reap its benefits’ (Herring, 2003: 202). Indeed, in a global report by World Wide Web Foundation, it is noted that ‘a high proportion of women and men surveyed recognize and value the Internet as a space for commenting on important issues, and say that the Internet has made it safer for women to express their views’ (World Wide Web Foundation, 2015: 5). But one may wonder whether the internet (and especially social media, in this case) indeed alters deeply rooted cultural patterns of gender inequality, or whether such patterns are carried over into on-line communication. In her survey of research on gender and the internet published between 1989 and 2002, Herring (2003) concludes that ‘the body of evidence taken as a whole runs counter to the claim that gender is invisible or irrelevant on the Internet, or that the Internet equalizes gender-based power and status differentials’ (p. 203). In effect, deeply entrenched gender assumptions and stereotypes were carried over into online communication. Almost two decades on, not much appears to have changed, especially in Africa, even though there have been series of calls against gender stereotypes and biases. Strategic objective J.2 of the Beijing Platform for Action, for instance, reiterates the need to ‘promote a balanced and non-stereotyped portrayal of women in the media’ (Beijing Platform for Action, 1995: 101). In responding to this call, contributors at the Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa’s (CODESRIA) annual gender symposium on ‘Gender and Media in Africa’ acknowledge, among other things, that there are still questions on the representations of women in the media (Nwosu et al., 2013). Such concerns are troubling, especially in social media spaces where there seems to be no strict regulation for content.

Using data from online news articles and three social media outlets – Facebook, WhatsApp and Twitter – we discuss the representation of women in the discourses on the 2019 National Science and Math Quiz (henceforth NSMQ) in Ghana. Particularly, we explore (Ghanaian) stereotypical views about gender and science/math and the relationship between language, gender, and culture.

Gender stereotypes and the concept of STEM

Gender stereotyping is pervasive in our society. This is the practice of associating attributes, characteristics, roles and behaviors to an individual man or woman by virtue of his/her membership in a social group of men or women (Hilton and von Hippel, 1996). According to Ellemers (2018), generally, stereotypes reflect a society’s general expectations about members of a particular social group. Moreover, ‘identifying the nature and content of gender stereotypes clarifies the fact that they not only describe typical differences between men and women, but also prescribe what men and women should be and how they should behave in different life domains’ (p. 276). For instance, as research in the Ghanaian context has shown, submissiveness, subordination to men, motherhood and homemaking competencies (e.g. cooking) are some of the expectations of women which are deeply entrenched in the family setting. Women are also seen as less assertive, weak, dependent, and beauty-conscious (see Diabah, 2019; Diabah and Amfo, 2015; Fiaveh et al., 2015). Conversely, men are expected to demonstrate leadership, authority, strength, power, bravery, control over women, phallic competence, among others (see Adinkrah, 2012; Ampofo and Boateng, 2011; Diabah, 2019; Fiaveh et al., 2015; Miescher, 2005). These are similar to Ellemers’ (2018) argument that a man is associated with assertiveness, competence, and performance whereas a woman is expected to be warm, caring, and supportive. Additionally, traits like ‘assertiveness and performance are seen as indicators of greater agency in men, and warmth and care for others are viewed as signs of greater communality in women’ (p. 277).

One would expect that such gender stereotypes would not have a place in the educational context, where the focus is on intelligence or academic excellence. Contrary to expectations, studies have shown that female students, for instance, are perceived to be less brilliant than male students in science-related courses (Leslie et al., 2015). Moreover, the implicit assumption that math or science is not for girls (see Example 1) is observed among girls as early as age nine. This assumption develops further into the girls’ adolescent period leading to a low enrollment in math (Steffens et al., 2010).

In an attempt to answer the question ‘Why are so few women in STEM-related fields?’ Carli et al’s (2016) study demonstrates that women are perceived to lack the essential qualities (leader-like, analytical, competitive, resilient, and independent) needed to be successful scientists (p. 244). They provide evidence which point to the fact that people perceive scientists (Math and Science) to be more like men than women (whenever people think of scientists, the picture that comes to mind is that of a man).

A similar study conducted by Baah-Korang et al. (2015) on the gender disparities in the enrolment in Elective Math program in Senior High schools in Ghana demonstrated that 50.5% of the male students participated in Elective Math while that of female participation was 27.2% (see Lamb, 1997 for similar findings).

In Ghana, as a way of addressing the gender imbalance in science and math-related courses, there have been some interventions mainly aimed at encouraging girls to participate in male-dominated fields of study. As far back as 1987, the Ghana Science Clinics for Girls was established by the educationist J.S. Djangmah, a former Director General of the Ghana Education Service (Andam et al., 2015). The clinic was a holiday camp where girls were exposed to science courses without having to experience any form of competition from boys. The girls had the opportunity to interact with female role models who had excelled as scientists.

Another intervention strategy, introduced in 1993, was the National Science and Math Quiz (NSMQ). For the purposes of the present study, we provide a background to this contest.

Background to the NSMQ

The National Science and Mathematics Quiz, established in 1993, is an independent television program in Ghana. This keenly contested competition promotes the study of Science and Mathematics amongst the youth, with Senior High School students being its main focus. The quiz also helps in developing quick thinking skills and probing minds of both the student participants and viewers/supporters. The contest has so far consistently encouraged healthy academic competition and rivalry amongst participating senior high schools. The participating schools, selected from all parts of the country, converge in the capital city, Accra, to compete for the enviable title, ‘NSMQ Champions’.

The quiz sessions are led by a quiz moderator who takes the competing schools through five rounds of questioning. At the end of each competition, a winner is selected to proceed to the next stage of the competition. This continues until the finals, where only one school is crowned the ‘NSMQ Champion’. Since its inception, only women have moderated the NSMQ. Between 1993 and 2000, the late Professor Marian Ewurama Addy, a biochemist, served as the quiz moderator. She was succeeded by Dr. Eureka Emefa Adomako, a botanist, who steered the competition between 2001 and 2005. Dr. Elsie Effah Kauffman, a biomedical engineer, took over from Dr. Adomako from 2006 till date. For the 2019 edition, two additional moderators; Dr. Thelma Ohene-Agyei (Pharmacist), and Dr. Gladys Odey Schwinger (Environmental Scientist), joined Dr. Kauffman as quiz moderators. The deliberate choice of women as quiz moderators is aimed at promoting the study of Science and Mathematics amongst young female students. Apart from moderating the competition, these women also act as role models, especially for the girls. The aim is to demonstrate that Science is not necessarily an all-male domain¹.

In the history of NSMQ, only boys’ schools have won the majority of the contest. A mixed school, Achimota Senior High School, has had two wins. So far, no girls’ school has ever had the opportunity to own the bragging right as ‘NSMQ Champions’ as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

List of past winners.²

Year	Winning school	Sex	1st Runner-up	Sex	2nd Runner-up	Sex
1994	Prempeh College	Mixed	Achimota School	Mixed	Accra Academy	Males
1995	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	Opoku Ware School	Males	– ³	–
1996	Prempeh College	Male	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	– ⁴	–
1997	Opoku Ware School	Males	Prempeh College	males	Barsto Senior High School	Mixed
1998	Achimota School	Mixed	St. Peter’s Senior High School	Males	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males
1999	Mfantsipim School	Males	Wesley Girls’ High School	Females	Opoku Ware School	Males
2000	St. Peter’s Senior Secondary School	Males	Mfantsipim School	Males	Achimota School	Mixed
2001	Pope John Secondary School	Males	Ghana Secondary Technical School	Males	Chemu Senior High School	Mixed
2002	Opoku Ware School	Males	St. Peter’s Senior High School	Males	–⁵	–
2003	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	Opoku Ware School	Males	St. Peter’s Senior High School	males
2004	Achimota School	Mixed	St. Peter’s Senior Secondary School	Males	Prempeh College	Males
2005	St. Peter’s Senior Secondary School	Males	Opoku Ware School	Males	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males
2006	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	St. Peter’s Senior High School	Males	–⁶	–
2007	St. Augustine’s College	Males	Kumasi Anglican Senior High School	Mixed	Accra Academy	Males
2008	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	Opoku Ware School	Males	Wesley Girls’ High School (all female)	Females
2009	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	Achimota School	Mixed	Kumasi Anglican Senior High School	Mixed
2012	Ghana Secondary Technical School	Males	St. Francis Xavier Junior Seminary	Males	St. John’s Grammar School	Mixed
2013	St. Thomas Aquinas Secondary School	Males	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	Mfantsiman Girls’ Senior High School (all female)	Females
2014	Mfantsipim School	Males	Ghana Secondary Technical School	Males	St. Francis Xavier Junior Seminary	Males
2015	Prempeh College	Males	Adisadel College	Males	University Practice Senior High School	Mixed
2016	Adisadel College	Males	Opoku Ware School	Males	Mfantsipim School	Males
2017	Prempeh College	Males	St. Thomas Aquinas Senior High School	Males	Adisadel College	Males
2018	St. Peter’s Senior Secondary School	Males	West Africa Senior High School	Mixed	Adisadel College	Males
2019	St. Augustine’s College	Males	Presbyterian Boys’ Secondary School	Males	St. Peter’s Senior Secondary School	Males

Wesley Girls’ High School made it to the finals in 1999. They, however, lost the trophy to Mfantsipim School and placed 2nd in the competition. In 2008, Wesley Girls again got to the finals, but placed third. In 2013, another girls’ school, Mfantsiman Girls’ Senior High School, came close to winning, but lost the trophy to St. Thomas Aquinas Senior High School. Mfantsiman Girls placed third in that competition (see section on ‘women as unfit for STEM’ for further explanation provided by a male teacher on why no girls’ school has won the competition over the past 26 years).

Feminist Critical Discourse analysis

This paper is analyzed through the lenses of Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA). FCDA broadly explores the links between language use and gender practices. Its focus is on ‘how gender ideology and gendered relations of power are (re)produced, negotiated and contested in representations of social practices’ (Lazar, 2005: 11). It is concerned with exposing and critiquing unequal gender and power relations in discourse. FCDA researchers have an explicit interest in uncovering the ‘hidden agenda’ of discourse which may create and sustain these gender inequalities (Litosseliti, 2006: 55–56). Lazar (2005) therefore emphasizes that FCDA aims at ‘critiquing discourses which sustain a patriarchal social order: that is, relations of power that systematically privilege men as a social group and disadvantage, exclude and disempower women as a social group’ (p. 5). This focus is in consonance with the concepts of hegemonic masculinity and femininity, which guarantee and legitimize the dominant position of men and the subordination of women (Connell 1995, 2005; Schippers 2007). As Connell (1987) rightly points out in his definition of emphasized (hegemonic) femininity, these are oriented to accommodating the interests and desires of men.

Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (as well as the concepts of hegemonic masculinity and femininity) is useful in explaining the sexist discourse that characterized the 2019 NSMQ – a discourse that generally suggests that women who pursue (academic) excellence, especially in male-dominated fields like Science and Math, are usurpers who need to be kept where they ‘belong’.

Our focus in this study will not only be on critiquing the representations that disadvantage women, but we will also highlight those that (appear to) work in their favor. Riding on the back of Litosseliti’s (2006) argument about the ‘hidden agendas’ of discourse, we shall highlight and reinterpret (where necessary) the subtle representations of women’s power. Indeed, Wetherell and Edley (1999) note that although hegemonic masculinity, for example, is centrally connected to the subordination of women, it is not automatic that all women will be subordinate to all men. Rather, hegemonic masculinity and femininity involve ‘contest and constant struggle’ (p. 336) because people sometimes challenge or resist traditional notions of masculinity and femininity in certain contexts. Thus, women (or men) may challenge hegemonic masculinity or femininity in some contexts through various ‘strategies of resistance or forms of non-compliance’ (Connell, 1987: 184) – what Schippers (2007) refers to as enacting ‘pariah femininities’ (p. 95). This, in fact, is in line with Lazar’s argument that

For feminist CDA, the focus is on how gender ideology and gendered relations of power are (re)produced, negotiated and contested in representations of social practices, in social relationships between people, and in people’s social and personal identities in texts and talk (Lazar, 2005:11, emphasis added).

It will be argued in this paper that the tenacity of the Wesley Girls’ High School in the 2019 competition is evidence of how the girls challenge the perception that Math and Science are the preserve of males, the people with ‘brains’ (note that it is the only girls’ school to have made it to the 2019 semifinal stage of the competition, and the only girls’ school to have ever come close to winning – the first runner-up in 1999).

Methods

The data discussed in this paper were gathered from online news articles and three social media outlets – Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter. Memes, Facebook statuses, and threads of comments were compiled from these social media outlets. Relevant Tweets were identified using the hashtags #NSMQ2019 and #NSMQTrolls. Memes from Facebook were compiled from a public page known as NSMQ Trolls (aka Against & Trolls association of the National Science and Math Quiz). Currently, the page has about 25,533 Followers and 22,242 Likes. Data from WhatsApp were gathered from various group pages, to which the authors are linked. The news articles were shared on the online page of the media house (MyJoy online). This is the website of Joy Fm, a privately-owned radio station in Accra (the capital city of Ghana). In all, 28 gendered texts,⁷ comprising memes, status updates, comments on posts, and news article headlines were compiled from these platforms. Out of this number, 20 are discussed in this paper.

For the analysis, we paid particular attention to the language and linguistic tools/strategies used in the gendered texts. Visual texts that communicate particular gendered assumptions or reinforce the messages of the written texts were also considered. The texts were further categorized under the following emerging themes; women as ‘unfit’ for STEM, women as objects of sex and beauty, women as home makers, women as supporters, and challenging gender stereotypes. This was done by highlighting some recurring phrases, concepts, and images as instances of particular themes. For instance, a phrase like ‘returned to the kitchen’ was identified as an instantiation of the stereotypical representation of women as homemakers, and a phrase like ‘body and hair treatment school’ directed at a girl’s school was identified as an instantiation of the stereotypical representation of women as beauty-conscious.

Stereotypical representation of women in NSMQ 2019 discourses

In this section, we discuss the representation of women in the discourses on the 2019 NSMQ by examining the language and linguistic tools employed via online news articles, memes, Facebook status and comments, shared on WhatsApp, Twitter, and Facebook. We also investigate the use of visual texts to communicate particular gendered assumptions or reinforce the messages in the written texts. The data is presented under the following themes: women as ‘unfit’ for STEM, women as objects of sex and beauty, women as homemakers, and women as supporters.

Women as ‘unfit’ for STEM

As noted in the section on ‘gender stereotypes and the concept of STEM’, women are generally seen as lacking the qualities required to be good scientists and mathematicians (Carli et al., 2016; Leslie et al., 2015). Examples of the characteristics associated with men, which are deemed useful for the science and math fields, include being leader-like, analytical, competitive, and independent (Carli et al., 2016). For instance, when asked why no girls’ school has ever won the NSMQ, a male teacher from one of the contesting schools provided the explanation in Example 1.

Example 1:

NSMQ does not favor girls – Teacher⁸

Mr. Y [pseudonym used] . . . . explained that though the girls are good, they are almost always unable to handle the pressure from the competition, especially segments requiring swift responses. ‘It does not favor the ladies because the girls are trained to pass WASSCE,^9’ Mr. Y told Joy news. According to him, this explains why no girls’ school has ever emerged winners of the competition in the last 26 years.

The teacher’s comment presents the girls as people who only perform better under examination conditions. One could possibly interpret this to mean the Ghanaian concept of ‘chew and pour’, that is memorizing course contents and reproducing them just to pass one’s examinations. Thus, the girls often find it challenging when taken out of the examination context and brought face-to-face with situations that require them to think on their feet and provide swift and accurate responses. This aligns with claims by some dominance theorists about the competitive nature of men (see West and Zimmerman, 1983). For instance, men are considered to ‘initiate topics more successfully, control the floor, and interrupt women in mixed-sex talk’ (Diabah, 2011: 60; Spender, 1980; cf. West and Zimmerman, 1983). Conversely, women do not have the requisite skills to be analytical and competitive, which are useful skills in STEM.

In Example 2, the author highlights the low performance of girls in the NSMQ by arguing that out of the 27 seeded slots, only one girls’ school (Wesley Girls’ High School) managed to secure a slot.

Example 2:

The author further questions the relevance of the other female contestants by asking 3nti mma nu, ad3n? You only came to chop PrimeTime dema food anaa? Translations of both the Akan (first) and Pidgin (second) sentences are presented below:

3nti mma nu, ad3n? ‘so, the women, why?’ (Akan)

You only came to chop PrimeTime dema food anaa? ‘You only came to consume Prime Time’s¹⁰ food, right?’.

Note the use of the face with tears of joy emoji, which we interpret as a ridicule. In this example, the author code-switches between Akan and Ghanaian Student Pidgin English. As explained by Deumert et al. (2019), people code switch in online discourses mainly because such ‘digital technologies can be understood as spaces of sociolinguistic freedom that allow people to write outside editorial control’ (p. 574). Such freedom, we believe, offers the authors the opportunity to localize their message in order to appeal to their readers. Creating this ‘local appeal’ for readers is what also informs their use of Ghanaian Student Pidgin English, since the target audience is Senior High school students.

The author trolls the eliminated girls’ schools by describing them as only being there to consume food without contributing much to the contest. This is a reflection of the Akan proverb ‘Mmaa pԑ deԑ [adeԑ]/[sika] wᴐ “women love (to be) where [possessions are]/[money is]”’, which portrays women, stereotypically, as opportunistic (see Diabah and Amfo 2015: 16). Such representations (see also Example 10) trivialize the efforts the girls have put in and rather portray them as ‘unfit’ for the contest and, by extension, science and math.

Women as objects of sex and beauty

The representation of women as sex objects¹¹ is one of the recurring findings from gender studies (Chytkova and Kjeldgaard, 2011; Diabah, 2020; Fredrickson and Roberts, 1997; also see Wolin, 2003 for some reviews in the media). These studies show how women have often been represented as ‘sex objects for the gratification of the (straight) male gaze’ (Lazar, 2007: 157). In her study of how some male students of a Ghanaian university represent women in their profane songs, Diabah (2020: 12) for instance notes how women are reduced to mere sex objects. She notes that in response to why these male students focus on women in relation to sex, some of the students interviewed argued that sex is what women have to offer, and their attraction to women is sex-motivated. Studies such as Fredrickson and Roberts (1997), Anderson et al. (2011) and Ellemers (2018) have also shown that men, as well as women, often evaluate women in terms of their appearances rather than their accomplishments. For this reason, it is usually the case that in our general judgment of a woman’s worth, physical appearance is highly ranked, even in contexts where looks are irrelevant – a typical case is the NSMQ, which is expected to focus on intelligence, not beauty or sexual appeal. The examples below illustrate these points further.

Example 3:

Example 3 focuses on women’s physical appearance in ways that are suggestive of sex. By juxtaposing the picture of the girl’s droopy eyes with the expression ‘Persco made Geyhey cum’, we argue that the author trivializes the girl’s excellent performance by shifting our focus from her performance to her sexualized appearance. Note that ‘cum’ here refers to ‘come’, which is a transliteration for the Akan word aba in ne ho aba (literally, his/her body has come), that is orgasm. The author makes use of imagery, as he combines the euphemism ‘cum’ and the girl’s droopy eyes to create a vivid picture of orgasm. The author sexually objectifies the girl by associating her eyes with orgasm. This supports Fredrickson and Roberts’ (1997) argument that ‘always present in contexts of sexualized gazing is the potential for sexual objectification’ (pp. 175–176).

Example 4:

Like Example 3, this post also focuses on the physical appearance of a female contestant instead of her intelligence. Not only does the author derogatorily describe the girl (who stood in front of a board to solve an equation) as having flat buttocks, but he further accentuates his description with a lengthened form of the interjection her! to heeerrrr. This interjection is used to mark intensity, that is the girl has a really flat buttock. The author concludes his description with the English adjective rough, also used as a marker of intensity in Ghanaian Student’s Pidgin English. The interpretation of this author’s sentiments as derogatory is based on the assumption that a beautiful figure or shape, in the Ghanaian/African sense, is associated with having big buttocks and hips and a small upper body – what is often referred to in Ghanaian parlance as ‘the Coca-Cola shape’.

Example 5:

Example 6:

In examples (Examples 5 and 6) above, women are represented as though they were commodities to be shared – they are without agency and can thus be ‘chosen’. For instance, in Example 5, the second comment every bro go choose dione ‘everybody (boy) will choose Dione’ provides additional context for the sexualization discourse that had dominated the contest. Like in Example 3, arguing that every boy will choose Dione again shifts our focus from her intelligence to her beauty (especially her sexy eyes which had become the focus of attention, see Example 3).

Similarly, in Example 6, the author ‘announces’ (to the attention of everybody on the page) that he is looking for the number of the girl in his post by saying: ‘Please if you have her number DM me. . .have a surprise for her’. This post generated comments, some of which are illustrated in Example 7:

Example 7:

Speaker A (female name):

Pls leave her alone, she is but a little girl

Speaker B (male name):

Hahaha this things normally happen ooo.

Speaker C (male name):

Take give your sister ‘give her to your sister’

Speaker D (male name):

What has she don3? ‘what has she done?’

Speaker E (male name):

Aswear ‘I swear’

Speaker F (male name):

Speaker A [pseudonym used], please allow them to see into the future.

We observe from the above exchanges that a female (Speaker A) steps in to warn the male respondents to ‘Please leave her alone, she is but a little girl’. This warning further solicits the response ‘Speaker A [pseudonym) please allow them to see into the future’, that is to say that, the boys admiring the girl’s beauty should be allowed to see into their future (having a possible relationship with her). Again, rather than focusing on the fact that the girl is from the only girls’ school left in the contest, that is Wesley Girls’ High School, attention is rather on her physical appearance and how to possibly win her love. Consider also Examples 8 and 9 below:

Example 8:

Example 9:

In Example 8, Aburi Girls and Holy Child (both girls’ schools) students are presented as being beauty-conscious. The Akan expression me to aba w’ahu? roughly translated as ‘my buttocks have increased in size, right?’ portrays the girls as being more interested in acquiring the African ‘Coca-Cola’ shape rather than excelling academically. Similarly, Example 9 describes the girls from Holy Child as scoring 24 points in the contest, a figure equivalent to the number of times they admire themselves in the mirror before leaving for the inter-schools’ competitions. The assumption here is that it is during these competitions that the girls get the opportunity to mingle with boys, so they do all they can to look good and appear attractive (for the boys’ schools). This description of the girls in both examples aligns with Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) objectification theory which posits that ‘girls and women, . . . may to some degree come to view themselves as objects or “sights” to be appreciated by others. This is a peculiar perspective on self, one that can lead to a form of self-consciousness characterized by habitual monitoring of the body’s outward appearance’ (p. 180). The girls are therefore presented as objectifying their bodies ‘for the gratification of the (straight) male gaze’ (Lazar, 2007:157). As Fredrickson and Roberts (1997) rightly point out, such self-objectification or self-conscious body monitoring by women, which is a strategy for determining how others will treat them, obviously has implications for their quality of life. It is our view that reproducing or reinforcing these stereotypes, in such a competitive academic context, has the potential of negatively affecting the girls’ performance – as if to say ‘after all, everyone expects us to look our best, and not necessarily to win the context’.

Women as homemakers: the ‘cooking is for women’ discourse

In many cultures, including Africa, women are seen as the ‘makers of the home’. This stereotypically feminine role consists of taking care of various forms of domestic work such as cooking, cleaning, doing laundry, bringing up children, taking care of husbands, and ensuring that the entire family is well supported (Diabah and Amfo, 2018). As postulated by Ellemers (2018) women across different countries and cultures tend to spend more time on domestic chores than men do, regardless of their employment status (pp. 277–278). These societal roles, that is men as economic providers and women as homemakers, develop over a period of time due to the way boys and girls are educated and socialized.

In reporting the news about Wesley Girls’ High School losing the competition to St. Peter’s Senior High School (a boys’ school) in Example 10, the writer metaphorically captions his article ‘NSMQ2019: Wesley Girls “returned to the kitchen” to give PERSCO a Slot in the finals’. In this headline, the writer stresses on the stereotypical feminine role of the place of a woman being the kitchen – which, by extension, is the home and all domestic chores including child bearing and nurturing. The author brings to bare the ‘cooking is for women’ discourse (Diabah, 2011), while at the same time highlighting the point that the slot in the finals must be left for the men (Donkor 2019; cf. Plange, 2019).

Example 10:

The choice of the verb return, which means ‘to come or go back to a previous place’ (Cambridge Dictionary online) in this headline, implies that the girls moved from the kitchen to take part in the competition. So now that the game is over for them, they are to go back to where they came from or where they originally should be— the kitchen – so the boys can have their slot back. This portrays the girls as ‘unfit’ for the race, and by extension, science and math (see sections on ‘gender stereotypes and the concept of STEM’ and ‘women as unfit for STEM’). It is underlyingly hegemonic, as it creates a patriarchal social order in which men are seen to be at the forefront and in charge of affairs while women remain at the background, in ‘their kitchens’.

Women as supporters

Another common representation of women is perceiving them as supporters. Our examples illustrate two sides of this stereotype. The first presents women as subordinate to men. This stereotype is based on the fact that within the African context (and of course in other patriarchal societies), there is a perception that the appropriate position of a woman is below, behind or second to a man. A woman is therefore expected to be submissive in all her ways and actions to a man and to support him to succeed – as shown by the popular saying ‘behind every successful man is a woman’. This assumption is articulated in Examples 11 and 12 below:

Example 11:

Example 12:

Example 11 shows the school crests of Presec and Aburi Girls’ respectively (note that the Aburi Girls’ School crest is positioned below the crest of Presec). The sentence, ‘We are with you all the way’ tagged to the Aburi Girls’ crest demonstrates the support of the girls for their boys albeit ridiculed by the author who expresses his/her amusement in Pidgin English, The Abugiss and Rosa¹² people dey funny me waaa ‘The Abugiss and Rosa people are so funny’.

In Example 12, the Wesley Girls’ High school contestants are being advised by the other girls’ school(s)¹³ to stay in their war rooms and offer prayers of support for their men to win the contest (note the use of the simile ‘like’, in comparing Wesley Girls with Aburi Girls and St Roses; the common feature being compared here is that they are all girls’ schools, and as such they must behave in the same way). Of particular interest here is the use of the inclusive pronoun ‘we’ in the sentence ‘Just like we did for Presec and St. Peter’s’. This suggests that the author is a student of one of these girls’ schools (Aburi Girls or St Roses). Also note that Presec and St. Peter’s are both boys’ schools. By this statement, the author tacitly admits to women’s subordination to men or their position in society as second to men.

This references the widely held concept of hegemonic or emphasized femininity – which centers on an acceptance of and compliance with an understanding that women are subordinate to men (Connell, 1987; Diabah, 2011; see also Schippers, 2007).¹⁴ This ‘acceptance’ of women’s second-place in society is normative and therefore legitimate. As Connell (1987) rightly points out, such representations are oriented to accommodating the interests and desires of men. Accordingly, the performance of the Wesley Girls’ students is perceived as challenging the status quo, thus, unacceptable.

On the other hand, the portrayal of women in Example 12 as supporters or subservient can be reinterpreted as a representation of (subtle) power. We focus here on the linguistic strategy ‘allusion’, where the author refers directly to the ‘War Room’ movie (to properly contextualize this, we provide a brief synopsis of the movie ‘War Room’).¹⁵ In this movie, the female protagonist restores a broken family. Portrayed as a warrior, she takes charge of her family and does all she can to bring back joy into her home (note the use of the war metaphor here to paint a vivid image of strength, perseverance, courage, and strong-will). The allusion to this movie is interesting, in the sense that, in real life contexts, when it comes to war or battle, men are usually in the lead. Indeed, there are few cases where women led wars, for example, Queen Yaa Asantewaa (Asante Kingdom in Ghana), but even in such cases, the women were compared to men. The allusion to this movie illustrates the second stereotype, where women are presented as powerful supporters, that is, subtle representation of women’s power.

Apart from portraying the importance of prayer, that is prayer as a powerful weapon which is capable of changing lives, we also seek to interpret this as a powerful construction, where the prayers of a woman for her wayward husband brings about victory. Based on this, we argue that even though in Example 12, the female contestants are advised by other females (from two girls’ schools that dropped out in the earlier stages of the contest) to stay behind and support their men, also underneath this supporting role is a subtle construction of power (possessed by women) that is believed to help the men win the contest.

Another context where the supporting role played by women also demonstrates (subtle) power is illustrated in Example 13 below:

Example 13:

In Example 13, the author, possibly an Mfantsipim boy (boys’ school)¹⁶ congratulates Wesley Girls’ on their win. The congratulatory paragraph is however prefaced with the sentence ‘when the husbands are unavailable, the wives are always in charge’. This statement is in reference to the fact that with Mfantsipim School out of the contest, Wesley Girls (their Girls’ school) is in charge. The author further retorts that Redyee a barb why ubi wonna girls school. U squad always get wonna back translated as ‘Now, I understand why you are our girls’ school. You people always have our backs’. This example also reproduces the stereotypical representation of women as second to men; they can only be in charge when the men are not there. We argue that this is underlyingly hegemonic. Nevertheless, we see a representation of ‘subtle’ power at play as the author acknowledges the important role the girls play as supporters who always look out for their men and also win on their behalf (other forms of the representation of women’s power are presented in the following section).

Challenging gender stereotypes: Representations of (subtle) power

Findings from the data analysis show that women were sometimes represented as challenging the stereotypes or the status quo, some of which are representations of (subtle) power. Some of these representations are discussed in the examples below (also see Examples 12 and 13 for similar representations of power).

Example 14:

Three categories of schools are seen in this example (Wesley Girls is a girls’ school, Achimota is mixed and Prempeh College is boys). The author uses the metaphor of rape to drum home his/her message. Note that the picture we get from rape is that of a powerful (usually) male taking advantage of a powerless (usually) female. This post therefore represents a reversal of power, taking note of the fact that although Achimota is a mixed school, it was represented by only boys. In other words, the success of the girls is directly compared to the strength and power of a rapist whereas the boys from Achimota school are seen as powerless rape victims. What is more interesting is how Prempeh College, a boys’ school, is also represented as powerless as we see an image of a helpless observer in the phrase ‘Prempeh College looked on’. The metaphor of rape in this example also gives us a sense of usurping the dominant male power, just as a rapist forcefully takes what does not belong to him. In uncovering the ‘hidden agenda of discourse’ (Litosseliti, 2006: 55), we argue that this metaphor reinforces the stereotype that the fields of science and math are for males, and that females who go into it can only be described as usurpers.

In Example 15, the author uses a fire metaphor to reinforce the imagery of ‘power’ seen in the contest.

Example 15:

NSMQ2019: The last fire of feminine power extinguished as Wesley Girls’ exits

The last girls’ school standing in the National Science and Maths Quiz has been snuffed out by the defending champions; St Peter’s SHS.¹⁷

As shown in the headline of the report above, the girls are not only described as powerful (feminine power) but also as ‘fire’. Depending on the angle from which we look at fire, it can be described as good (e.g. cook, provide warmth in cold temperatures) or bad/destructive (e.g. burn and kill). The author’s use of the fire metaphor here reflects the powerful and destructive nature of fire. Through this, we see an image of the dominant male power being threatened by ‘feminine power’, like a ravaging fire. However, this fire is not allowed to see the light of day as it is ‘extinguished’ or ‘snuffed out’ (note how these words evoke an image of a complete destruction or an end to something) by the ‘defending champions’ – that is the true custodians of power.

Another representation of ‘feminine power’ is seen in Examples 16 and 17, where Ghana Secondary School (Ghanasco) was represented at the NSMQ contest by a predominantly female group (four girls and one boy, shown in Example 16).

Example 16:

Example 17:

The rhetorical questions on this post (Example 17) So one boy p3 he dey rep (Pidgin) ‘so there is only one boy representing?’ and ‘so the boys in this school no [emphatic pronoun in Akan] what do they do?’ are equally important because they reinforce the perception that Math and Science are predominantly male fields. It is perhaps okay for a girls’ school to compete with boys, but for a mixed-sex school to be represented by predominantly girls is demeaning – hence the rhetorical question is interpreted as a ridicule. This is similar to Ellemer’s (2018) findings that ‘men who behave modestly in a professional context violate expectations of the masculine stereotype and are disliked because they are seen as weak and insecure’ (p. 286). Unfortunately, women who exhibit behaviors that portray their competence, ambition and competitiveness are equally derided. In line with our Feminist Critical Discourse Analytic stance, we however argue that posts such as the above reflect the power of femininity, though subtly represented. They challenge the stereotype that these fields are not ‘fit’ for women and rather highlight the tenacity of women.

In what appears to be a more positive representation of the girls’ school, the author in Example 18 subtly reinforces a stereotype that a man must be more brilliant than his wife.

Example 18:

Using hyperbole (i.e. 500% brilliant) as a linguistic strategy, the author first acknowledges the intelligence of the girls. This is an overt representation of power since education is perceived as power.¹⁸ However, this text also shows a reinforcement of an underlying stereotype that a woman is not expected to be more powerful than a man, especially in relationships. It is demeaning for a woman to be seen as more brilliant and powerful than her husband. This is evident in the author’s use of tweakai, which can be described as ‘an Akan emotive interjection that expresses “contempt” for a person’ (Thompson, 2019: 1). As Thompson further notes, it is ‘derogatory and expresses lack of respect for the user’s target’ (p. 1). Thus, the use of tweakai in this example shows the author’s contempt or strong disapproval of the idea of a woman dominating her husband.

Example 19 also shows a seeming positive representation of the women, since Wesley Girls (GeyHey) is represented as the winners and thus more powerful. On the other hand, the boys’ school, Mfantsipim (Botwe) is represented as the losers as GeyHey pushes them out of the contest.

Example 19:

A critical analysis of Example 19 however reveals that women are rather the losers. It is worth noting that the three winning schools Presec, Owass, and Augusco are all boys’ schools, whereas the losing schools Aburi, Louis, and Holi are all girls’ schools. Thus, GeyHey, which is the winning team in this particular contest, is considered as ‘boys’ whereas Botwe is considered as ‘girls’. In other words, it is because women are ‘not fit for the race’ that the Botwe boys are represented as ‘girls’. This analysis is in line with our FCDA stance, which focuses on exposing and critiquing the reproduction of unequal gender and power relations in discourse. Through the lenses of FCDA, we argue that this example reflects what Litosseliti (2006) refers to as the ‘hidden agenda’ of discourse which creates and sustains gender inequalities (pp. 55–56). As Lazar (2005) rightly points out, discourses on such representations sustain a patriarchal social order or power relations that systematically empower men but disadvantage, exclude or disempower women (p. 5). Donkor (2019: no page) makes similar observations when she expresses her concern about how women have to navigate ‘tight ropes in . . . [the] social narratives making rounds’. As she further argues, boys are mocked when they are defeated by girls, but when girls are defeated by boys, it only proves that boys are by default intellectually better. Similarly, Ellemers (2018) postulates that ‘women who display agentic behavior (by being competent, ambitious, and competitive) seem insufficiently nice and are disliked and devalued as a result’ (p. 286). Unfortunately, the GeyHey girls are not given the credit here for who they really are (i.e. girls); they can only get the credit if they are seen as ‘boys’.

Another representation of women’s subtle power is seen in Example 20, which is a post about the quiz moderator.

Example 20:

A rough translation of the Pidgin text is provided below:

‘As for this woman, if you are her husband and you want to have sex with her, she will say calculate the depth of your dick using scientific notations’.

In making reference to sex (chop is a colloquial form for sex), the author notes that the husband of the quiz moderator will have to agree to her demands before he can even sleep with her (this comment was made in relation to how meticulous and strict she has been throughout the contest). This is interpreted as a sign of power. In other words, the stereotypical representation of men as sex-conscious (see Diabah, 2020; Diabah and Amfo, 2015) is considered here as a bait for the woman to exercise her ‘power’ in the bedroom. For instance, in their study of how women are represented in Akan proverbs, Diabah and Amfo (2015) note how some of the proverbs point to women’s power in sexual encounters. They argue that ‘because of men’s strong sexual urge, women use sexual guile as a form of power to keep them in line – for example, a man may agree to any request from a woman so long as she is ready to sleep with him’ (p. 19). There is a sense of this ‘bottom power’, in Ghanaian parlance, in the example above.

On the other hand, it can also be argued that there is a reinforcement of the stereotypical representation of women as petty or vindictive. One would have thought that sex between husband and wife should have no ‘price tags’ attached. However, through the use of hyperbole, the woman in this example is represented as ‘punishing’ the man for making such a request.

Summary and conclusion

This paper set out to examine the representations of women as espoused in the social media discourses on the 2019 edition of Ghana’s National Science and Math Quiz (NSMQ). Overall, we have demonstrated that gender stereotyping is prevalent even in contexts (i.e. national educational contest) where one would ordinarily not expect to see such discourses. For instance, findings suggest that women who pursue (academic) excellence, especially in male-dominated fields like Science and Math, are perceived as usurpers who need to be kept where they ‘belong’. They are thus presented in particular stereotypical ways – women as ‘unfit’ for STEM, women as objects of sex and beauty, women as homemakers, and women as supporters/subordinates. This runs counter to some of the arguments in gender and media scholarship that the internet is inherently democratic, creating opportunities for less powerful groups like women to participate on a par with more powerful groups like men (see World Wide Web Foundation, 2015 global report; Danet 1998; Graddol and Swann, 1989; but also see Herring, 2003 for a counter argument. Indeed, in her condemnation of the sexist discourse that characterized the contest, the founder of the Pepper Dem Ministries, a feminist group, rightly observes:

the advent of social media has seen an increase in unsavoury sexist jokes that are gradually becoming normalized and associated with the competition. Every year we see these jokes recycled, refurbished and remixed to convey deeply seated toxic gender narratives. Narratives that we work around the clock all year round to challenge, correct and change to advance the status and image of women and girls in our society (Plange, 2019: no page)

Thus, the advent of social media has opened up spaces for large public platforms, which are largely unregulated for content, to circulate and perpetuate disparaging sexist discourses that might not have been circulated or perpetuated in the same manner before Web 2.0 or in face-to-face interactions in contemporary times.

In support of the public condemnation that followed the contest, especially from gender activists and feminist groups,¹⁹ we argue that representations such as the above can be demoralizing, as they tend to mock the mental fortitude and resilience the girls had exhibited throughout the contest. They can, thus, deter other girls from taking part in such contests. They also, unfortunately, defeat the purpose for using only female scientists as moderators since the inception of the NSMQ contest in 1993. As explained earlier, the deliberate use of female moderators is aimed at promoting Science and Math amongst young female students. The quiz moderators act as role models, particularly for female students pursuing STEM courses. The overall goal is to demonstrate that STEM is not necessarily an all-men domain. We therefore agree with Donkor (2019) that these representations are not only troubling but they also spit in the face of the significant progress women have made over the years to break through the glass ceiling. Indeed, a call for condemnation through gender activism and academic criticism is in order. Accordingly, and in line with our Feminist Critical Discourse Analytic stance, which makes room for uncovering, contesting and reinterpreting the ‘hidden agendas’ of discourse (Litosseliti, 2006), we analyzed the various nuances of the representations, some of which we (re)interpreted as representations of women’s power. By this, we seek to highlight the power and strength of women and to recast the sexist and disparaging discourse that characterized the contest.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The first version of this paper was presented at the Department of Linguistics’ weekly seminar series in October 2019. We are grateful to the participants for their valuable comments and suggestions, which greatly improved the quality of this paper. We also thank Ida Assem and Dufie Forson for proofreading the final version of the paper. This paper has also benefitted from critical comments from an anonymous reviewer, who we would like to acknowledge.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author biographies

Dorothy Pokua Agyepong is a lecturer in the Department of Linguistics, University of Ghana. Her research interests include: Semantics and Pragmatics of African languages, Syntax, gesture studies, and the sociolinguistics of urban youth (contact) languages.

Grace Diabah is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Linguistics, University of Ghana. Her teaching and research focus on language use in specific domains, with special interest in language use and the construction of gender identities. Some of her works include: The representation of women in Ghanaian radio commercials: Sustaining or challenging gender stereotypes? in Language in Society; A Battle for supremacy? Masculinities in students’ profane language use, in Journal of Men’s Studies; Caring supporter or daring usurpers? Representation of women in Akan proverbs (with Nana Aba Appiah Amfo), in Discourse and Society.

References

Adinkrah

(2012) Better dead than dishonoured: Masculinity and male suicidal behaviour in contemporary Ghana. Social Science & Medicine 74(4): 474–481.

Ampofo

Boateng

(2011) Multiple meanings of manhood among boys in Ghana. In: Tamale

(ed.) African Sexualities: A Reader. Cape Town: Pambaz, pp.38–62.

Andam

Amponsah

Nsiah-Akoto

, et al. (2015) Women in science in Ghana: The Ghana science clinics for girls. In: AIP Conference Proceedings, 31 December. New York: AIP Publishing LLC.

Anderson

Diabah

hMensa

(2011) Powerful women in powerless language: Media misrepresentation of African women in politics (the case of Liberia). Journal of Pragmatics 43(10): 2509–2518.

Baah-Korang

Gyan

McCarthy

, et al. (2015) Gender differences in participation in elective mathematics of senior secondary school students in Ghana. Journal of Education and Practice 6(8): 85–92.

Beijing Platform for Action (1995) United Nations fourth conference on women, Beijing platform for action, Section J, women and the media. Available at: www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/beijing/platform/media.htm (accessed 20 April 2018).

Carli

Alawa

Lee

, et al. (2016) Stereotypes about gender and science: Women≠ scientists. Psychology of Women Quarterly 40(2): 244–260.

Chytkova

Kjeldgaard

(2011) The modern woman myth as a means of cosmopolitan cultural capital accumulation: A gendered acculturation perspective. Research in Consumer Behavior 13: 199–216.

Connell

(1987) Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

10.

Connell

(1995) Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.

11.

Connell

(2005) Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.

12.

Danet

(1998) Text as mask: Gender and identity on the Internet. In: Jones

(ed.) Cybersociety 2.0. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp.129–158.

13.

Deumert

Panović

Agyepong

, et al. (2019) African languages and mobile communication – between constraint and creativity. In: Wolf

(ed.) Cambridge Handbook of African Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.555–574.

14.

Diabah

(2011) ‘My Lioness Wife’: Construction of Gender Identities in the Discourse(s) of Ghanaians in the UK Diaspora. PhD thesis, Lancaster University, Lancaster.

15.

Diabah

(2019) The representation of women in Ghanaian radio commercials: Sustaining or challenging gender stereotypes? Language in Society 48(2): 261–283.

16.

Diabah

(2020) Projecting masculinities or breaking sociolinguistic norms? The role of women’s representation in students’ profane language use. Gender & Language 14(1): 99–120.

17.

Diabah

Amfo

NAA

(2015) Caring supporters or daring usurpers? The representation of women in Akan proverbs. Discourse & Society 26(1): 3–28.

18.

Diabah

Amfo

NAA

(2018) To dance or not to dance masculinities in Akan proverbs and their implications for contemporary societies. Ghana Journal of Linguistics 7(2): 179–198.

19.

Donkor

(2019) Chief gender officer calls on Ghanaians to desist from sexist trolling of students. Available at: https://africaneyereport.com/nsmq-chief-gender-officer-calls-on-ghanaians-to-desist-from-sexist-trolling-of-students/ (accessed 17 July 2019).

20.

Ellemers

(2018) Gender stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology 69: 275–298.

21.

Fiaveh

Izugbara

Okyerefo

MPK

, et al. (2015) Constructions of masculinity and femininity and sexual risk negotiation practices among women in urban Ghana. Culture, Health and Sexuality 17: 650–662.

22.

Fredrickson

Roberts

(1997) Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly 21(2): 173–206.

23.

Graddol

Swann

(1989) Gender Voices. Oxford: Blackwell

24.

Herring

(2003) Gender and power in on-line communication. In: Holmes

Meyerhoff

(eds) The Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp.202–228.

25.

Hilton

Von Hippel

(1996) Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology 47(1): 237–271.

26.

Lamb

(1997) Gender differences in mathematics participation. Educational Studies 23(1): 105–125.

27.

Lazar

(2005) Politicizing gender in discourse: Feminist critical discourse analysis as political perspective and praxis. In: Lazar

(ed.) Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp.1–28.

28.

Lazar

(2007) Feminist critical discourse analysis: Articulating a feminist discourse praxis. Critical Discourse Studies 4(2): 141–164.

29.

Leslie

Cimpian

Meyer

, et al. (2015) Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science 347(6219): 262–265.

30.

Litosseliti

(2006) Language and Gender: Theory and Practice. London: Hodder Education.

31.

Miescher

(2005) Making Men in Ghana. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

32.

Nwosu

Gadzekpo

Bahi

(eds) (2013) Special issue on gender and media. Available at: https://www.codesria.org/spip.php?article2523&lang=en (accessed 13 October 2018).

33.

Plange

(2019) Problem of the Day: Toxic Narratives from NSMQ. https://starrfm.com.gh/2019/07/problem-of-the-day-toxic-narratives-from-the-nsmq/ (accessed 17 July 2019).

34.

Schippers

(2007) Recovering the feminine other: masculinity, femininity, and gender hegemony. Theory and Society 36: 85–102.

35.

Spender

(1980) Man Made Language. London: Routledge.

36.

Steffens

Jelenec

Noack

(2010) On the leaky math pipeline: Comparing implicit math-gender stereotypes and math withdrawal in female and male children and adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology 102(4): 947.

37.

Thompson

(2019) Tweaa!–A Ghanaian interjection of “contempt” in online political comments. Ampersand 6: 100047.

38.

West

Zimmerman

(1983) Small insults: A study of interruptions in cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In: Thorne

Kramarae

Henley

(eds) Language, Gender and Society. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp.102–117).

39.

Wetherell

Edley

(1999) Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Feminism & psychology 9(3): 335–356.

40.

Wolin

(2003) Gender issues in advertising: An oversight synthesis of research: 1970–2002. Journal of Advertising Research 43(1):111–130.

41.

World Wide Web Foundation (2015) Women’s Rights Online Translating Access into Empowerment. Available at: http://webfoundation.org/docs/2015/10/womens-rights-online_Report.pdf (accessed 10 October 2020).