Final Report - Elloise Layus: What is it like to be A Woman? From "Question Everything" by Agnes Callard (Chapter 10)

I want you to think to yourselves, "how many times have I changed the topic of conversation because it became too controlled by gender?" or "how many times have I personally controlled the conversation by using gender?" Now, think about how it made you feel. Did it illicit a response of fear, embarrassment, and even a disinterest to continue conversing with the other person? Did it give you a sense of power and a higher position over the conversation? And if it makes sense for a doctor to use the phrase "as a doctor" in a conversation even though you are already aware of their position, why would the phrase "as a woman" be considered any less? This is all explained in Agnes Callard's insightful deep dive into the question, "What Does It Mean to Speak as a Woman."

As introduced in her designated chapter in the book, "Question Everything," Callard introduces the idea of "managerial standing" and "information standing" in conversations (QE  pg. 307). These "standings" are explained to have a significant amount of power in conversations not only when it comes to gender, but some other topics as well. So, what is managerial and information standing? The example she illustrated to explain informational standing is this, "let's distinguish two ways in which the expertise of a physicist might figure in a discussion of some question. First, it might allow her to introduce facts into the conversation that have bearing on the question" (QE pg. 307). This raises the question, "so what is managerial standing?" Her example latches onto the previous one, continuing to claim that "it might put her in a privileged position to manage the conversation: to determine who speaks when, how the question in pursued, when it counts answered, and so on" (QE pg. 307) This idea of holding power over others in conversation often makes the other feel like they're being overpowered or have no say in the conversation. So is this the reason we feel like we need to back away from certain conversations? Well, there are some other factors that play a big role in this question. Callard explains that because, as humans, we want to feel like we can relate to our counterpoint on an equal level. So once we lose that feeling of likeness, we tend to become uninterested in what they have to say. Things like gender, race, and socioeconomic status have been found to immediately create this feeling of separation. So naturally, using the phrase "as a woman" when talking to a man would likely cause him to feel like he can no longer relate, therefore causing disinterest and uncomfortableness. Callard claims that when women adopt managerial standing on the basis of demographic fact, she is saying that "given the difference between us with respect to gender, race, and socioeconomic status, we cannot converse as equals--moreover, that in order for us to converse, you have to allow me to be in some way in charge of the conversation" (QE pg. 308). This grab for power makes the other person feel like they're being purposefully humiliated or even bullied just so I (the woman) could show off in front of others.

"Could I claim such standing over a male scientist who had extensively studied the relevant domain of the female experience (including first person reports)? No" (QE pg. 307). This is a claim Callard has made in relation to informational standing. It is the hard truth that when in conversation, a male doctor would hold more weight talking about the female experience rather than the actual woman herself. While some people could claim that this is completely valid and fair considering he has a degree and has studies the female experience extensively, I personally think that the first hand experience should always be considered on a higher level. If I were having a discussion about my body, I would like people to believe that my first hand experience gives me, in this case, more informational standing over a male doctor who does not have any experience within my body. However, there are exeptions to this idea of a male doctor having information standing over the female. For example, if you are having a conversation with someone about rape and she says "as a rape victim," in no way is there ever an instance where a male rape reseacher would have managerial standing over the actual rape victim. On my deep search for more answers on discussing the female experience, I discovered some articles that I found really interesting. They delve deeper into the questions about how gender plays a role in conversations, how the gender gap in still prevalent, society, and especially in politics. The gender gap in politics is more evident than ever. Now, while being a woman can give you more informational standing in conversations, it is also important to make sure you don't let it progress to managerial standing. This would be using your informational standing to your advantage in order to take full control of the conversation, which doesn't result in a learning environment or a healthy conversation at all. I believe, and so does Agnes Callard that we can't let gender completely dictate our discussions, or else no one would ever be able to provide any input. So, to elaborate and expand on my pervious discussion questions, do you think you have every unknowingly used informational standing to your advantage and let it become managerial standing? Or, have you ever purposefully used your elevated knowledge to progress to a point of managerial standing within a conversation? Do you enjoy knowing that you are at a higher level than your counterpoint and do you like to have complete control over the conversation? Do you believe that the phrase "as a woman" should be taken any different than "as a doctor?" These are questions we have to ask ourselves as we converse with others that we may not be able to relate to on a personal level. Whether it be race, gender, socioeconomic status, or even political view, we have to acknowledge our differences, similarities, and everything in between so we can expand both our own views on society and theirs as well.