Conclusion

A dualistic system regarding men’s and women’s essential natures as, chronologically, rational or emotional developed from ancient religions and philosophies and became a story that was difficult to resist, on the part of those it privileged and those who had no power to resist. Attempts continue to be made to destroy or reduce the inequality produced by this continuing binary perception, but even in an age when we acknowledge the complexity of human nature and champion the rights of all, that story continues to be difficult resist. This is partly because it is problematic to produce an alternative story. Women, as we saw, are faced with the problematic of either appropriating the male domain which merely reconstructs the power structures they are resisting, or of making a claim for a female role without subjugation. An alternative is to question those constructs through a post-human view of the instability of human nature and the possible fluidity of gender.

Within education, commentators continue to explore the role of gender in the learning process and how the perception of education as a domain that privileges the male and rational impacts upon women as learners (Belenky et al 1997; Beard et al 2007; Leathwood and Read 2009; Leathwood and Hey 2009). This discussion is rife with problems given that, while some commentators decry the value judgements afforded to the emotional, they continue to reinforce it as the domain of the female, in particular through arguments that suggest women need more emotional support than men in education (Leathwood and Hey 2009). Those who are worried about the influence of a therapeutic culture over education (Furedi 2004; Ecclestone and Hayes 2007 and 2009) are perhaps naive in ignoring the gendered argument, as Leathwood and Hey (2009) suggest, however, we might also applaud their project to reassert the importance of reinstating emotion as being a spur to learning rather than a limiting factor (Ecclestone and Hayes 2007). 

Emotion does affect the way in which people learn, whether it be elation at a good experience or anxiety over performance. E-learning may open up new possibilities for the experience of learning, although there is no guarantee that it will not amplify existent power structures, given that learning in cyberspace might remove the social constraints necessary to conduct fair and polite communication (MacDonald and Hedge 2006). The notion of the learner negotiating with a mechanistic environment, one which has been, historically, male, might be made more powerful by an appropriation of technology as a female domain, as suggested by Cyberfeminists, however this would, again, be exchanging one privileged power structure for another. However, online learning can provide a locus for discussion over the nature of gender by, either encouraging dialectic within the content of the course, or, in the case of Second Life, providing a locus that’s liminality unites both a realistic and a fantastical space to explore and encourage consideration of gender roles, providing the opportunity for both men and women ‘to live in a more equitable society and explore new roles’ (Oxaal and Baden 1997 cited in MacDonald and Hedge 2006, p.4).
Proceed to references
Return to menu