3. Qui a Peur d’une Pédagogie Différentielle des Sexes?

Abstract

tente ici de faire valoir le point de vue selon lequel il demeure pertinent, contrairement à ce que la rectitude politique me semble vouloir prêcher, de s’interroger sur les possibles différences entre les hommes et les femmes en ce qui a trait aux aspects de la dynamique psychique que la problématique pédagogique interpelle. Je fais d’abord remarquer que je n’ai pu trouver aucune « théorie scientifique » s’y rapportant dans les sciences humaines prétendant s’y intéresser. Je propose ensuite une amorce de traitement théorique de la problématique, que je pousse jusqu’à l’opérationnalisation, puis à un premier test empirique, qui m’apparaît concluant quant à l’intérêt de poursuivre la lancée. En conclusion, je lance quelques pistes de réflexions sur les implications de ma théorie relatives à la pratique pédagogique.

Toward Renewed Constructions of Masculinity and Femininity: Measuring Significant Psychological Differences between Young Men and Women’s Subjective Experiences in Their Romantic Relationships

“…The paragraphs were analyzed by judges who were familiar with the theoretical constructs (inter-rater reliability ranged from .90 to .98), in order to determine the number of "masculine" (objectal) and "feminine" (subjectal) expressions in each participant's paragraph. The results were used to place participants on the bipolar continuum initially presented by Lamontagne (2010), based on the ratio of masculine to feminine expressions used in the paragraph. According to the results obtained, the majority of men (79%) were "primarily objectal."…”

“…Rather than evoking multiple types of masculinities or femininities, fundamental factors would be applicable to all individuals, regardless of surface traits. In other words, according to the new proposed theory (Lamontagne, 2010), an emotional, dependent, non-athletic, and physically weak man could be considered to be 100% "masculine." Correspondingly, an aggressive, independent, and socially powerful woman could be considered to be 100% "feminine."…”

“…In contrast to the more open writing task used by Lamontagne (2010), the qualitative tool administered in the present study was modified based on the reasoning presented above. The mandatory use and conjugation of 5 verbs allowed for more homogenous data collection, and facilitated inter-paragraph comparison by controlling the quantity and type of expressions used.…”

“…Moreover, because of the subjectal nature of some paragraphs received from male participants, and their above demonstrated tendency to comply to masculine norms, this further emphasized that participants answered honestly. Lastly, while media could have played a role to condition male participants to answer objectively while females subjectively, it is in fact theorized that media (especially musical) and art have long manifested the very innate concepts of objectality and subjectality (see Lamontagne's (2010) cover page for an example).…”

“…Although Lamontagne (2010) presents "femininity" and "masculinity" as fundamental opposites on the spectrum of psychological male/female duality, he conceptualizes masculinity and femininity on a single bipolar dimension. The continuum is characterized by a proportion of 0% femininity and 100% masculinity at one end (0%F/100%M) and 100% femininity and 0% masculinity (100%F/0%M) at the opposite end.…”