October 15 - 18, 2008 

Construction of Identity through Otherness

Ester Höhle

Research Assistant

Technische Universität München

(Alemania)

The construction of identity is often done by contrasting to the other. That means identity is found by differentiating by what one group is like and that it is not like the other group (ingroup - outgroup). This process of structuring polarizes within and among groups occurs throughout all societal levels, ethnities, strata, between male and female.

The existence of “the other” group strengthens the power of identity. I want to show this process at the example of gender relations in technology. In Mexico as well as in Germany there is only a small percentage of women in technical fields (12% female engineers). So, women build a minority inside the male dominated culture. I want to discuss the question why male hegemony is still – in spite of many political and pedagogical measures to integrate women – vivid and active. And how it can happen that the male culture keeps being impermeable and self-reproductive.

The topic shall be discussed using three different theoretical approaches. Solutions can be derived for educational methods giving equal chances to every student.

1 - Nancy Chodorow uses a psychological approach. In order to find an own identity as men, at the age of puberty boys have to “cut” the symbiosis with their mother and distance from them. They have to become the “opposite”. By that they are forced to suppress parts of their emotionality and develop a less integrated set of feeling than women. Chodorow sees that as the reason for men’s cognitive development, resulting in attraction to technology, “lifeless things”, factual topics. Contrariwise women are attracted to “care”. Fox-Keller’s science analysis describes how western sciences are built up along a polarizing line. “Hard” sciences have a masculine connotation and strongly devide into subject (researcher) and object. “Soft” sciences such as pedagogy, psychology show a large mergence between researcher and what is being examined (subject=object).

2 - Karin Flaake presents a social-psychological approach where she observes interactions in student groups, age 11 and older. She finds that gender roles are being constantly constructed newly. Different from girls, boys construct their masculinity by being not feminine, that means avoiding feminine behaviour and symbols. It can be interpreted as a male fear of femininity. If a boy doesn’t follow the male role construction he may be excluded from the group. Girls, girls’ behaviour as well as their body representation are openly degraded. While the masculine presentation strives for independence, superiority and strength, technology serves as a symbol for masculinity.

3 - After Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological concept the habitus is a socialized set of styles, taste and morals shared by a certain group, a system of internalized patterns that creates culturally typical thoughts, perceptions and actions. Individuals feel these patterns are their own but they share them with the other members of their group. People with a common habitus accept each other more easily (“one of us”). The habitus serves as symbol for being a group member. When “doing gender”, a gendered habitus is being reproduced. Under these perspectives integrating solutions will be given.

About Ester Höhle:

Ester Ava Höhle, M.A., sociologist, studied sociology, anglistics and philosophy at the University of Stuttgart, Germany. Since December 2007, she has been working as research assistant for Gender Studies in Engineering at the Technische Universitaet Muenchen (TUM), Germany. Before she worked at University of Stuttgart, University of Hohenheim (Megacities, Casablanca), Center of Technology Assessment, Federal Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth.Her main research fields are: Sociology of Technology, Environment and Risk Perception, Gender, Student Surveys in (Higher) Education, Modernization,

Return to list of abstracts

Return to conference homepage