“She were a cracker”: Talking gender and sexuality at work

Dr. Louise MullanyUniversity of Nottingham, UK

Gender and Language BAAL SIG:Gender and Corpus Linguistics

Lancaster University 30th March 2010

• “doing” gender (Butler 1999; 2004)

• Gender identities as contested, pluralised and fluid

Introduction

• Gender, sexual, personal and professional identities• Hegemonic Discourses: broader social

structuration (Sunderland 2004; Baker 2008)

Mixed methodologies (Holmes & Meyerhoff 2003; Swann & Maybin 2008; Mullany 2008)

Away from ‘armed camps’ (Silverman 2000: 10)

Quantitative, survey approaches: corpus linguistic tools and techniques

Qualitative approaches

Methodology

Approaches•Indexicality of gender identity (Ochs 1992)

Direct indexicality: girl/boy: talk-in-interaction/CA (Stokoe and

Smithson 2001)

Indirect indexicality: expectations, norms: indexing social meanings: how gender is relevant (McElhinny 2003)

•Feminine and masculine CofPs (Holmes and Stubbe 2003)

CANBEC24 companies in total: 2000-2004

‘Internal’ v ‘External’ (Handford 2007)

Manufacturing, IT, telecommunications, pub chain, travel agents, accountants, museum, magazine, hotel, management consultancy, finance/banking

Recordings: UK, also Ireland, Spain, Germany, Japan

Range of private companies and speakersMeetings: 912,734 wordsHandford and McCarthy (2004)

Company type: Words in 1000s (Handford 2007: 76)

Gender and CANBECCorpus tagging Gender make up:

79% men21% women

Gender, professional role, status

Gendered term FREQUENCIES <M> <F>

boy 14 2 12

boys 27 19 8

girl 29 22 7

girls 21 18 3

man 126 118 8

-man (occupational titles)

37 32 5

men 55 37 18

woman 19 13 6

-woman (occupational titles)

0 0 0

women 17 6 11

lad 28 28 0

lads 96 96 0

lass/lassielasses

00

--

--

guy 195 174 21

guys 147 120 27

Girl: random sample

DataExternal meeting: Manufacturing

Hydraulics Company & Tyre Company

Sales/Negotiation

All male meeting: 7 participants

Tyres: M3, M5, M6

Hydraulics: M1, M2, M4, M7

Age: 30-39: 3; 40-49: 3; 50-59: 1

Analysis: frequenciesDirect indexicality: gender as topic

she

girl

woman

bird

last night: emerges as a narrative topic about the same female referent

Give us a phone call a bit like that bird last night she was gonna have it

Oh right which one was that? This

All the drugs trying to keep that

bird

bird

had fell out the ugly tree and had a

out of his room

sitting in it (laughter) scary woman was she? She was like Joe on steroids

cos you may well have a woman replacement for yourself but they are

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Mick I did in my own little way she was so drunk she’ll never remember

You told her that I tell you what she’d

got a cracking pair of legs on her you know

nice cuppa thank you (2 sec) she was gonna have it any way which way but

The bicycle thing yeah I think she was just a tease she did the job on you

No I just sort of did that laughter she picked up chair and went over and sat

All Data © Cambridge University Press

‘She was gonna have it any way which way but loose last night.’

27/32 instances of’ she’: same referent: ‘woman’ who they had met socially ‘last night’

Evidence of a recurrent narrative topic: ‘last night’: Explore as a two-word cluster:

Did you have a good night last night I did yeah we were just saying

was (laughter) you told me last night I’d got a job here (1 sec) same

trying to find James oh oh right last night be my guest I’m saying nothing

laughs cos we could have scored last night yeah definitely Mick you made

us a phone call bit like that bird last night She was gonna have it both ways

any way which way but loose last night till contraceptive came in (10 sec)

Off (4 sec) laughter that girl last night If you’d played your cards right

that’s why you went choir singing last night You can’t believe them they they

a lot for you ho= hospitality last night And thank you very much for the

he spoilt my fucking evening last night Didn’t he (1 sec) fucking hell Rod

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Strategic positioning of this narrative: See Mullany (forthcoming)

Qualitative analysisMultifunctionality of:

Narrative: strategic positioning

Humour: banter, insults, sexist humour

small talk-----------------------core business talk (Holmes 2000)

Display of dominant hegemonic masculinist identities through these discourse devices

Opening

<M4> Did you have a good night last night?

<M6> I did yeah We were just saying that's all (1 sec) part of it and it gives you that little bit of a buzz for the next day for (1 sec) you know the business side

[…]

<M4> Morning Cecil

<M0> Morning

<M4> Are you coming Are you joining us?

<M0> I no I'm trying to find James

<M4> Oh oh right

<M3> last night

<M4> Be my guest

<all laugh>

<M5> I'm saying nothing <xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

<M4> good company then

<M3> Eh she were a cracker

<1 sec subdued laughter>

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Mid-meeting

<M5> Yeah so if you elay= email me and Mick

<M3> Okay email yeah Rod and I

<M2> Yep

<M5> George

<M3> But give us a phone call

<M4> Yeah I will yeah You'll get it both ways

<M3> Give us a phone call

<M5> A bit like that bird last night She was gonna have it both ways until you put your fucking nose in

<laughter>

< 3 sec>

<M5> Nice cuppa

<2 sec>

<M3> She was gonna have it any way which way but loose last night

<M5> Till contraceptive came in

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Negotiation<M3> Hundred and twenty two hundred fucking hell <M6> Can you tell us what's gone down please<M5> (1 sec) ((laughs))<M6> Do you normally get both?<M2> Level of service that's {dropping off}((4 sec laughter))<M4> That girl last night if you'd played your cards right<M?> Yeah(4 sec) ((raucous laughter))<M?> You played your cards right<M3> If you hadn't of hadn't have interfered((laughter))<M6> What if I'd have gone and sat on another table on my own<M3> Yeah and then it might have been all right<M5> We did hint We did hint

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Closing<M4> Thanks very much for the business<M5> I think on on behalf of of the three of us thanks a lot for your

ho= hospitality last night and thank you very much for the {xxxx} Thanks a lot

<M4> Thank you<3 sec><M3> The only thing is that on the next review meeting could we keep

it too two members of the<M5> Yeah<M6> be interested in coming anymore <laughter><M5> Cos one member <M3> Duncan won't be able to make it<M5> Cos he won't be breathing[…]<M4> Do you want me book three rooms for you?<M3> Please<3 sec>

All Data © Cambridge University Press

Closing

<M4> Double for you and Rodney single for Dunc <1 sec> cos he won't need+

<M5> No no+

<M4> +anything else will he

<M5> +bugger his room he can stay in the car <2 sec > nice spring

<M6> You got a double together?

<2 sec >

<M3> He spoilt my fucking evening la= last night didn't he

All Data © Cambridge University Press

DiscussionCo-construction of multiple identities Stereotypically masculine CofP:

‘Last night’ narrative: hegemonic masculinist heroes (M3, M5) and anti-hero (M6)

Expletives

Humour: Sexist humour, banter, insults

Transactional & affective talk: inextricably interlinked

Pluralised masculinities

Dominant hegemonic discourse of heterosexual masculinity (Coates 2003; Sauntson 2008; Baker 2008)

Conclusions•Direct indexing of gender terms: mixed methods through corpus linguistics as initial survey approach

•Dominant hegemonic discourse of heterosexual masculinity in this ‘masculine’ manufacturing CofP•Integral and multifunctional role of humour, narrative, small/social talk

•Strategic positioning of narrative: Openings, negotiation, conflict/tension releaser, closings, solidarity-building, social distancing

References

Handford, M & M. McCarthy (2004) “Invisible to us”: A preliminary corpus- based study of spoken business English. In T. Upton & U. Connor (eds) Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. pp. 167-201.

Baker, P. (2008) Sexed Texts. London: EquinoxButler, J. (1999) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.

Second Edition. New York: Routledge.Butler, J. (2004) Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge. Coates, J. (2003) Men Talk. Oxford: Blackwell.Handford, M & M. McCarthy (2004) “Invisible to us”: A preliminary corpus-

based study of spoken business English. In T. Upton & U. Connor (eds) Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. pp. 167-201.

Handford, M. (2007) The Genre of the Business Meeting: A Corpus Based Study. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.Holmes, J. (2000) Doing collegiality and keeping control at work: small talk

in government departments. In J.Coupland (ed.) Small Talk. Harlow: Pearson, pp. 32-61.Holmes, J. and M. Meyerhoff (2003) Different voices, different views:

An introduction to current research in language and gender. In J. Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (eds) The Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 1-17.

ReferencesHolmes, J. and Stubbe, M. (2003) `”Feminine” workplaces: stereotype and

reality’. In Holmes, J. and Meyerhoff, M. eds. The Handbook of Language and Gender, Oxford, Blackwell, pp.573-600.

McElhinny, B. (2003) Theorizing gender in sociolinguistics and linguistic anthropology. In J.Holmes and M. Meyerhoff (eds) The

Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 21-42.Mullany, L. (2008) Negotiating methodologies: Making language and

gender relevant in the professional workplace. In K. Harrington, L. Litosseliti, H. Sauntson and J. Sunderland (eds) Gender and Language Research Methodologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 43-55.

Mullany, L. (forthcoming) Managers performing masculinities in business meetings: What we did “last night”. In J. Angouri & M. Marra (eds) Identities at Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Ochs, E. (1992) Indexing gender. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (eds)Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 335-358.

ReferencesSauntson, H. (2008)The contribution of queer theory to gender and

language research. In: K. Harrington, L. Litosseliti, H. Sauntson and J. Sunderland (eds.), Gender and Language Research Methodologies, 271–282. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Silverman, D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide. London: Sage.

Stokoe, E.H., & J. Smithson ( 2001) Making gender relevant: Conversation analysis and gender categories in interaction. Discourse & Society, 12: 217-244.

Sunderland, J. (2004) Gendered Discourses. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Swann, J. and J. Maybin (2008) Sociolinguistic and ethnographic

approaches to language and gender. In K. Harrington, L. Litosseliti, H. Sauntson and J. Sunderland (eds) Gender and Language Research Methodologies Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 21-42.