The Use Of Stories In A Political Process
Within the article by Sarah Earthy, she evaluates the concept of how ‘stories as a political process’, stating that “stories can be understood as political process alerts us to the power structures that permit certain stories to be told while silencing others. ”
In relation to university life, more specifically to Wickens reading, we can see the political powers within South Western University dominating over students and faculty, forcing their conservative viewpoint to the entire university. The framework behind this study follows Foucault’s notion of ‘governmentality’; which refers to the “naturalization of discursive statements, based on positions of authority and institutional force, into ‘truths’. These ‘truths’ produce regulatory processes that demarcate social and behavioural norms. ” In other terms; it requires individuals to mould themselves to fit these forces to ‘curb undesirable behaviours’. In relation to the study we can clearly identify this within the SWU campus, as the normal/natural ideal is to perform a heterosexual ideology, which should be demonstrated through certain behaviours, which disregard individuals who do not adhere to this and thus, perceiving them on a universal level as ‘weird’ or ‘queer’. However, although these politics are perceived as being ‘invisible’, faculty and students further enforce these behaviours in various ways. On a very public level students recall the events of a SWU football player in 1998 who spoke in front of an audience; including university admin that he was; “glad I go to a school where men like women and women like men”. This furthermore affirmed the normalcy of heterosexuality, disregarding other beliefs from communities such as LGBTQ+. With these normalized views come negative outcomes such as; fear and silence. Alongside this, it was found in regards to faculty that the topic of homosexuality in “college is not doing a very good job addressing issues related to homophobia and heterosexism”.
Using qualitative research, the recognition of homophobic actions witnessed by faculty members is staggering, finding that some have; ‘heard offensive comments made in private conversation’ yet the staff’s continuous failure to speak up shows the deeply rooted issues within the college. Others recalled memories of advisors who ‘steered students away’ from courses that incorporated challenging homophobia in its syllabus. These two events highlight the politics in SWU, showing the failures of faculty to address issues in fear of controversy and forcible silence, due to the extreme cultural values exercised and dominated by those in power. These politics enforced by the powerful individuals within the university are being challenged in order to confront social issues with the aim of an environment that encourages and promotes open dialogue regarding these ‘sensitive’ subjects, becoming advocates for diversity in college that is secular in opinion.
In relation to Plummers work examining gay and lesbian men and women, he observes that up until the 1970’s stories of these individuals were told in ‘silenced or told in secret’ up until the liberation of the LGBTQ+ community, we can clearly see that after years of oppression in SWU towards minorities their standpoint has changed; telling their stories with “pride and strength”, and as we can see above are actively seeking change for SWU.
