Abstract
Carol Gilligan, Joining the Resistance, Polity Press: Cambridge, 2011; 140 pp.: 978-0-7456-5169-9, $19.95, €20.40, £16.99 (hbk)
In her 2011 book Joining the Resistance Carol Gilligan is once again concerned with the notion of ‘voice’ (opinions, thoughts, feelings). In her famous 1982 book In a Different Voice she discussed women’s voices and moral development based on research concerning pregnant women trying to decide the future of their unborn baby. Gilligan had beforehand identified a problem within psychology which seemed apparent but which had not previously been noticed: that women’s voices and moral development were evaluated and judged in relation to theories based solely on male participants and to a male standard. Joining the Resistance revisits In a Different Voice. Gilligan again reflects on the concept of ‘voice’, which she uses as an alternative to the psychological term of ‘self’. Rather than focusing on women’s voices, Gilligan in her new book is concerned with the voices of young girls. The questions Gilligan asks are: Given the value of care and caring and the costs of carelessness, why is an ethic of care still embattled? What is the justice vs care debate about? And what is the relationship of all this to women? Why are women’s voices still in the forefront in bringing these matters to our attention?
For Gilligan, the first question can be answered using one word: patriarchy. Gilligan’s definition of patriarchy incorporates the importance of the father and an order of domination that strongly encompasses the family. This slightly different definition highlights the personal and familial aspect of patriarchy. The father becomes, and is, a continuous influence on girls’ voices. Gilligan uses the common notion of hegemony and men’s need to differentiate themselves from girls and women in order to discuss the notion of manhood and what it means to be a man, arguing that traditional manhood emphasizes independence, strength, and differentiation from women. Gilligan’s observations concerning gender roles and expectations are well documented in literature both from women’s/feminist studies and men’s studies. Gilligan argues that womanhood is synonymous with caring, relationships, and selflessness. Men, therefore, are not concerned with caring but with justice, often in military and violent terms. To make her point, Gilligan provides us with a recent example concerning the election of president Obama. Obama, a more democratic leader than the previous patriarchal manhood of George Bush, was called ‘dithering’ and ‘weak’ for not standing up to the military. According to the patriarchal view concerning manhood, men should not be concerned with democracy or caring, but with justice and war.
In Joining the Resistance Gilligan calls attention to the social construction of gender and to the expectations of set gender roles. Regarding the justice and care debate, Gilligan states that it is a struggle between traditional and modern gender roles and rights. Democracy (care) and patriarchy (justice) do not go well together because a patriarchal society depends on distinct roles for men and women that lack true equality. The care position goes against patriarchy and is deemed a concern for women. Gilligan claims, however, that we are looking at this from the wrong point of view. We must realize that caring is a human concern, not a concern for women. Gilligan writes that: ‘Once the ethic of care is released from its subsidiary position within a justice framework, it can guide us by framing the struggle in a way that clarifies what is at stake and by illuminating a path of resistance grounded not in ideology but in our humanity’ (p. 43). Gilligan means that when we remove our gendered lenses from the justice vs care debate we realize that care and care work concern not a feminine voice but a human voice.
It is when Gilligan becomes concerned with the third question, what is the relationship of all this to women, that she incorporates her research on girls and their voices into the discussion. Gilligan observed that many outspoken, honest, and intelligent young girls lose their ‘voice’ in early adolescence. Many girls also begin to self-edit their knowledge and their thoughts, increasingly using the words ‘I don’t know’ and ‘you know’. Here, Gilligan utilizes interview quotations but also presents the reader with historical evidence, drawing from the diary of Anne Frank which as she points out was quite heavily edited by Frank herself and her father in order for it to appeal to potential readers (p. 145).
According to Gilligan, these adolescent girls are afraid of using their ‘true voice’ because outspoken girls are punished for what they know. The girls she interviewed often stated that if they said what they thought, and what they knew, they would lose in terms of close relationships, both with friends and authority figures. Girls that say what they think are often described as ‘rude’ and ‘stupid’. In fact, when girls do not conform to a patriarchal view on proper behaviour for girls, they are not good girls. Gilligan describes the disapproval a 17-year-old girl faces at school as she interprets a poem in a non-traditional way. This girl is said to not understand the poem and is punished by receiving a lower grade. Here Gilligan unearths how a patriarchal view of girls can lead to discrimination and injustice in, for example, educational settings. The injustices Gilligan exposes in regards to how girl’s voices are stifled in the school system are disturbing and the book would be an educational read for faculty members. Gilligan does briefly mention that boys are also silenced, in regards to having close relationships, but her book focuses on girl’s voices.
Another term Gilligan discusses, as indicated in the title, is the notion of resistance. Girls know that they self-edit and that they are expected to do so. Gilligan states that: ‘My colleagues and I listened as the girls named the various inducements held out and the rewards to be gained by keeping their thoughts and feelings to themselves’ (p. 36). Unfortunately she does not reiterate these rewards but in accordance with other statements we can assume that the rewards are of a social nature. Gilligan speaks much about resistance, but even so she does not fully explain how she defines this term or how girls actually resist. Gilligan states that self-editing and silencing are politically and psychologically unhealthy and can lead to depression, thereby discussing psychological implications of gender role expectations.
So why is this subject of voice a concern for women? Why are women’s voices still in the forefront in bringing these matters to our attention? Gilligan argues that many women are part of and support patriarchal structures that decide proper ‘girl behaviour’. In this sense women have forgotten girls. Adult women must therefore remember their own disconnection at adolescence and join the resistance. In many ways, Gilligan claims, the ‘relationship between adolescent girls and women holds a key to the psychology and politics of resistance’ (p. 155). By recognizing how they were silenced and taught not to use their authentic voices when they were girls, women can now teach girls that they can say what they want and what they know. Adult women can guide girls to express their authentic voices by staying with girls at the critical time of adolescence. Gilligan means that girls and women are imperative to the struggle of resisting silencing of girls’ voices because girls, more so than boys, have certain behavioural leeway in regards to gender role expectations. Gilligan claims that young girls are ‘allowed’ to dress and act in ways that boys could not. For example, it would not be acceptable for a young boy to wear a dress to school. Such a statement is problematic however, because it appears to contradict Gilligan’s findings and statements and can be read to mean that the silencing of boys is more problematic than the silencing of girls.
Feminist themes are highlighted throughout the book as Gilligan foremost focuses her research on girls and women while discussing their place in psychology, a field that has been extremely male-focused in its approach and theories. Gilligan is very critical of psychology and especially of psychoanalysis which, she claims, initially focused on women as teachers of knowledge. Psychoanalysis, however, changed, probably with patriarchal influences that Freud could not resist, into silencing women’s voices. Freud’s theories have received much criticism (as well as praise) by feminist writers. Still, Gilligan’s take on Freud and his relationship with the women he encountered is enlightening and inventive and she successfully defends her standpoint.
Gilligan successfully answers the above questions and provides convincing and appealing evidence. Her approach is based on theory and concepts of ‘voice’ and is, in my opinion, theoretically very sound. Ideally, Gilligan could have made the reader more familiar with her research on girls and their voices. It is slightly difficult to understand the results of the study because methodology and result findings are not thoroughly discussed. Therefore, the reader is left with many questions considering how the study took place and the possible limitations Gilligan faced. In the place of such a discussion is the use of interview-based quotations, which are interesting but often not discussed beyond their presentation. A discussion or summary on Gilligan’s findings and data would help the reader develop their own opinion about the concept of ‘voice’ and the way in which Gilligan approached the subject. Gilligan’s research is, as always, interesting and thoughtful and should have been given more space in the book than she granted it. Rather than placing such emphasis on mythological and ancient stories, together with excerpts from a play she wrote with her son, she could have provided the reader with more of her research findings.
These shortcomings raise a number of questions about her methodology and results. How were the participants chosen? How were the interviews carried out? Did the research findings point to differences in the use of ‘voice’ in regards to ethnicity and race? Was ‘outspokenness’ also the result of class belonging, ethnicity, or race? Can Gilligan generalize all her findings to girls of different social classes and backgrounds? Gilligan briefly mentions the study by stating that the nearly 100 girls involved in the longitudinal study were ‘between the ages of seven and eighteen, diverse in ethnicity and social class background but having in common educational advantage’ (p. 36) but the reader still wants more information.
Despite my criticism, this is an interesting and enjoyable book that initiates a dialogue on how girls’ voices are silenced – implicitly and explicitly, unintentionally and culturally. What I took away from this book, most strongly, and what was reiterated throughout the book, was that now that we know how girls’ voices are silenced, how girls have to choose, we must change, we cannot ignore it. As Gilligan states: ‘The time to act is now’ (p. 180).