unit3genderdifference新编大学英语第二版第四册课文翻译

Gender Roles from a Cultural Perspective

Over the past few decades, it has been proven innumerable times that the various types of behavior, emotions, and interests that constitute being masculine and feminine are patterned by both heredity and culture. In the process of growing up, each child learns hundreds of culturally patterned details of behavior that become incorporated into its gender identity. Some of this learning takes place directly. In other words, the child is told by others how to act in an appropriately feminine or masculine way. Other details of gender behavior are taught unconsciously, or indirectly, as the culture provides different images, aspirations, and adult models for girls and boys.

Recently, for example, a study of American public schools showed that there is a cultural bias in education that favors boys over girls. According to the researchers, the bias is unintentional and unconscious, but it is there and it is influencing the lives of millions of schoolchildren every year. Doctors David and Myra Sadker videotaped classroom teachers in order to study gender-related bias in education. Their research showed that many teachers who thought they were nonsexist were amazed to see how biased they appeared on videotape. From nursery school to postgraduate courses, teachers were shown to call on males in class far more than on female students. This has a tremendous impact on the learning process for, in general, those students who become active classroom participants develop more positive attitudes and go on to higher achievement. As a matter of fact, in the late 1960s, when many of the best all-women's colleges in the northeastern United States opened their doors to male students, it was observed by professors and women students alike that the boys were \participation by women students had diminished noticeably. A similar subordination of female to male students has also been observed in law and medical school classrooms in recent years.

3 Research done by the Sadkers showed that sometimes teachers unknowingly prevented girls from participating as actively as boys in class by assigning them different tasks in accordance with stereotyped gender roles. For instance, one teacher conducting a science class with nursery school youngsters, continually had the little boys perform the scientific \while the girls were given the task of putting the materials away. Since hands-on work with classroom materials

is a very important aspect of early education, the girls were thus being deprived of a vital learning experience that would affect their entire lives.

Another dimension of gender-biased education is the typical American teacher's assumption that boys will do better in the \\subjects of math and science while girls are expected to have better verbal and reading skills. As an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy, American boys do, indeed, develop reading problems, while girls, who are superior to boys in math up to the age of nine, fall behind from then on. But these are cultural, not genetic patterns. In Germany, for example, all studies are considered \and it is girls who develop reading problems. And in Japan, where early education appears to be nonsexist, both girls and boys do equally well in reading.

The different attitudes associated with the educational process for girls and boys begin at home. One study, for example, showed that when preschoolers were asked to look at a picture of a house and tell how far away from the house they were permitted to go, the boys indicated a much wider area than the girls, who generally pointed out a very limited area close to the home. Instead of being encouraged to develop intellectual curiosity and physical skills that are useful in dealing with the outside world, as boys are, girls are filled with fears of the world outside the home and with the desire to be approved of for their \rules. These lessons carry over from the home to the classroom, where girls are generally observed to be more dependent on the teacher, more concerned with the form and neatness of their work than with its content, and more anxious about being \in their answers than in being intellectually independent, analytical, or original. Thus, through the educational process that occupies most of the child's waking hours, society reinforces its established values and turns out each gender in its traditional and expected mold.

从文化角度看性别角色

1 在过去的几十年里，已经无数次地证实了这样一个事实：构成男子阳刚之气和女子阴柔之气的各种不同类型的行为、情感、和兴趣都既是遗传又是文化熏陶的结果。在成长的过程中，每个孩子学会了细微的行为举止，数量之多数以百计，这一切都带有文化的烙印，成了他们性别特征的一部分。有些行为举止是直接学到的。也就是说，别人教孩子如何恰如其分地行事, 男有男的规矩, 女有女的标准。另一些跟性别有关的具体举止是无意识地或间接地学会的，因为文化为女孩子和男孩子提供的形象、向往的目标以及成人的榜样各不相同。 2 例如，最近对美国公立学校的一项研究显示，在教育中存在一种男孩比女孩更受偏爱的

文化偏见。据研究人员反映，这种偏爱是无意的、不知不觉的，但它确实存在，并每年都在影响着数百万计学生的生活。为了研究在教育中存在的性别偏爱，戴维?赛德克博士和迈拉?赛德克博士夫妇录制了教师在课堂上课的情形。他们的研究显示，许多自认为无性别偏爱的教师惊奇地发现，从录像带上看他们竟是那么偏心。从幼儿园到研究生课程，都可以看到教师们请男生回答问题的次数远比女生多。这对学习过程有着巨大的影响，因为总的来说，那些积极的课堂活动参与者对学习更加乐观有信心，并能在今后取得更大的成就。事实上，在20世纪60年代末期，当美国东北部多所最好的女子学院向男生开放之后，教授们和女学生们都发现男孩们正在“接管”课堂讨论，而女生积极参与的程度则明显下降。近年来，在法学院和医学院的课堂上也发现了类似的情况：与男生相比女生处于次要的地位。

3 赛德克夫妇所做的研究显示，教师有时候会按照固有的性别模式给女孩子和男孩子不同布置的任务，这样便不知不觉地使女孩子不能像男孩子一样积极地参与。例如，有位教师在给幼儿园的孩子上自然科学课时，不断地让小男孩去操作科学“实验”，而让女孩子只是做一些安放材料的工作。既然使用课堂材料动手操作是早期教育的一个重要方面，这些女孩子就这样被剥夺了重要的学习经历，这会影响到她们今后的整个人生。

4 美国教师中一个具有代表性的想法是，男孩擅长数学和自然科学，这些学科都是“难懂的”、“适合于男性的”，而女孩会在语言和阅读技能上比男孩强。这是教育中性别偏见的另一种表现。结果美国的男孩们确实在阅读上出了问题，而在数学方面女孩尽管在九岁以前一直比男孩强，但此后却落在了他们后面。这成了预言自我应验的一个例子。然而这些特征是文化造成的，而非遗传的原因。例如，在德国，读书学习都被看作是“适合于男性的”，于是在阅读上有问题的便是女孩子了。而在日本，由于早期教育似乎不分性别，女孩和男孩在阅读上就旗鼓相当。

5 在教育过程中对女孩和男孩的不同态度始于家庭。例如，有一项研究显示了这样一种情况：让学龄前儿童看一幢房子的图片，然后要他们说出家里允许他们走开多远，这时男孩所指的范围要比女孩大得多，女孩指出的范围很有限，而且离家很近。女孩们不像男孩那样受到鼓励去发展求知欲和动手能力，尽管这些正是与外部世界打交道时有用的；对女孩灌输的结果是：对自己家外面的世界充满了恐惧，且期望别人对自己的优良品格和循规蹈矩的服从精神加以认可。这类教诲从家庭一直延续到课堂。于是，在课堂里我们常常可以看到女孩们更依赖教师，更注重作业的形式和整洁而非内容，更在乎她们所给的答案是否“正确”而不在乎智力方面的独立自主以及分析能力和创造能力的提高。教育过程占据了孩子除睡眠以外的大部分时间，社会则通过这一过程加强了它固有的价值观，并按其传统的、期望的模式造就了不同性别的人。

Boys Are Teachers' Pets

The classroom is a man's world, where boys get two-thirds of the teachers' attention even when they are in a minority. They are allowed to tease the girls and they receive praise for sloppy work that would not be tolerated from girls. Boys are accustomed to being teachers pets, and, if girls get anything like equal treatment, boys will protest and even disrupt lessons.

These claims are made in a book out this week, written by Dale Spender, a lecturer at the London University Institute of Education. She argues that discrimination against girls is so typical of co-educational schools that single-gender classes are the only answer.

Her case is based on tape-recordings of her own and other teachers' lessons. Many of them, like Spender, had deliberately set out to give girls a fair chance. \more time with the girls than the boys.\

The tapes proved otherwise. In 10 taped lessons (in secondary school and college), Spender never gave the girls more than 42 percent of her attention (the average was 38 percent) and never gave the boys less than 58 percent. There were similar results for other teachers, both male and female.

In other words, when teachers give girls more than a third of their time, they feel that they are depriving the boys of their rightful share. And so do the boys themselves. \classroom where 34 percent of the teachers' time was allocated to girls. \doesn't like boys, and just listens to the girls,\gender got 63 percent of the teacher's attention.

Boys regarded two-thirds of the teacher's time as a fair deal—and when they got less they caused trouble in class and even complained to a higher authority. \important to keep their attention,\said one teacher. \they behave very badly.\

According to Spender's research, double standards pervade the classroom. \boys ask questions, protest, or challenge the teacher, they are often met with respect and rewards; when girls engage in exactly the same behavior, they are often met with criticism and punishment.\

A boy seeking attention will quickly get a response from a teacher. \can be ignored; their hands can be held up for ages, and their often polite requests for assistance are disregarded as the teacher is obliged to remain with the boys.\

One girl, talking about a male teacher, commented: \your hand up to tell him there was a fire, if you were a girl. We'd all burn to death before he asked you what you wanted to say.

Boys' written work, too, is judged by different standards, says Spender. When she asked teachers to mark essays and projects, the same work got better marks when teachers were told that it came from boys. \it, there's not a girl that can match him,\one teacher said of a project on inventions. But, in fact, the work had been done by a girl.

Neat and tidy work from girls was treated with some contempt. \think she could have spent more time on getting some facts than on making it look pretty, was one comment. \—YOU can't beat girls for being concerned with appearances,\indicated that the work came from a boy, the tune changed dramatically.

Spender concludes that, in mixed classes, the girls are at a disadvantage. If they are as noisy and ambitious as the boys, they are considered \they are quiet and passive, they are ignored.

A few schools have introduced single-gender groups for math and science, says Spender, and have found significant improvements in girls' results. Separating boys and girls within schools for certain subjects—rather than a return to single-gender schools—is the most hopeful solution she suggests.

男生是老师的宠儿

1教室是男生的天下；即使在他们人数并不占多数时，老师三分之二的注意力仍花在他们身上。他们被允许取笑女生，他们作业做得马虎却受表扬，要是女生做这样的作业就得不到宽容。男生们已经习惯于做老师的宠儿。如果女生也得到同等待遇，男生就会抗议，甚至扰乱课堂。

2以上这些话是伦敦大学教育学院的讲师戴尔·斯彭德在她本周出版的一本书中讲的。她认为在男女同校的学校里，歧视女生的现象太典型了，唯一的解决办法是实行男女生分班上课。 3她是根据她自己和其他老师的课堂录像这样说的。像斯彭德一样，许多老师曾有意给女生公平的机会。斯彭德说：“有时我甚至觉得我做得太过分了，我花在女生身上的时间比男生多。”

4录像显示并非如此。在录了像的10节课(包括中学和大学课堂)里，斯彭德对女生的关注从未超出42％(平均为38％)，而对男生的关注均超过58％。其他男女老师的情况也都相似。 5也就是说，当老师花在女生身上的时间超过三分之一时，他们就觉得自己剥夺了男生应得的时间。男生们自己也这样认为。“她老是问女生问题，”当老师在课堂上给了女生34％