Seite 103 [103]
OCR
WOMEN IN THE SCIENTIFIC ELITE ”288 Ini.e. to those aspects of it from which he/she derives some satisfaction. terestingly, a certain attitude can be observed by the representatives of the alternative type, which was detailed by Tajfel with regards to the intergroup behaviour in general, despite belonging to the cluster of women being fundamentally different from the groups he was researching. Still, an enhanced accent regarding the positive differentness of women (as opposed to the other types) is equally present in this model as well. There is no equality, as men cannot bear children [...] this distinction is thus always in favour of women. (Subject no. 29, natural sciences) We can see that gender-associated attributes can be indicators of their social roles as well, thereby appointing the position of an individual. After analysing the conversations and following the logic of the interviewees present in this group, some questions can be raised. Namely: How and on what foundation have the artificial signifiers of social gender and the characteristics rooted in biological gender shaped into attributes, and how can the manlywomanly attitudes be categorised? How can we state that a particular social action, performance, characteristic is manly and/or womanly? Why is creation “masculine”, if biology has determined the woman to be the creator (the one giving life), and why does the man not turn “feminine” by the act of creation? These questions appear in a similar manner in the modern theory of sense. “And because this is a type of question — let’s call it historical still - whose conception, formation, gestation, labour, we can today only glimpse. And I say these words with my eyes turned, certainly, towards the operations of childbirth.”?* These problems are thereby touching onto the fields of narratives and linguistic discrimination. We could consider the following quotation: “Certainly metaphors of literary maternity predominated in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries [...] Describing Thackeray’s plan for Henry Esmond, for example, Douglas Jerrold jovially remarked, ‘You have heard, I suppose, that Thackeray is big with twenty parts, and unless he is wrong in his time, expects the first installment at Christmas’.”?*° The interpretations of the interviewees allow us to conclude that nature and society are separated in their minds, and, according to their reading, the woman is the creator in nature — identified with family — while in society, the public sphere, the task of creation falls onto the man. Consequently, the real 288 Tajfel, H.: Csoportközi viselkedés, társadalmi összehasonlítás és társadalmi változás, in Lengyel, Zs. (ed.): Szociálpszichológia, Budapest, Osiris, 1997, n.d. 289 Derrida, J.: A struktúra, a jel és a játék az embertudományok diszkurzusában, Helikon. Vol. 40, No. 1-2, 1994, 34. 290 Jerrold-Tillotson, guoted by Showalter, E.: Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness, Critical Inguiry Vol. 8, No. 2, Writing and Sexual Difference, Winter, 1981, 188. e 101 e
