In the view of Martin (1981), a male cognitive perspective refers to the view of all knowledge from an unbiased lens. That is, all available knowledge incorporates a masculine perspective without considering female input. As such, any new scholars or learners initiated into the club of the educated can only view the world from a male point of view of enlightenment. Among the key characteristics of male cognitive perspective is the exclusion of women and their works during the development of bodies of knowledge. Also, as part of the male cognitive perspective, the females are portrayed according to their "male image." Further, the male cognitive perspective also involves the denial of women the feminine characteristics that they possess.
From the perspective of Martin (1981), genderized refers to the differential appraisal according to sex. It is thus the practice through which academic disciplines make distinctions based on gender differences. That is how the content of such disciplines draw differences among women and men when emphasizing on the male perspective. Such sex bias is thus entrenched into the concerned disciplines, leading to the exclusion of women from the subject matter of many academic concerns. As a result, only male perspectives are considered, even in instances where female perspectives would have been more applicable. Educated individuals only have a male point of view – even in female affairs. Primarily, Martin (1981) writes that the act of genderization leads to the distortion of the “lives, experiences, and personalities of women” within the subject matter of different disciplines.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Liberal arts, just like many other academic concerns, tend to advance the male view over the female perspective. Martin (1981) hints to the fact that knowledge is based on cultural stereotypes, and as such, entrench cultural beliefs. Liberal arts are viewed as a conversation on the cultural aspects, touching on how humans relate to each other. Martin (1981), however, criticizes this notion and notes that conversations on human existence cannot exclude as important a proportion of humanity as it currently does. In essence, Martin (1981) decries the belief that a great conversation can occur when women are spoken for by men. A great conversation cannot happen in instances where the females themselves do not adequately express the female perspective.
To Martin (1981), education presents a double bind for female students. Education is intended to offer enlightenment and to encourage free thinking. However, the subject matter of many disciplines has been genderized and often misrepresents female realities. As such, while female learners are expected to be enlightened, their taught concerns hardly mirror their realities as females because they are created from a male perspective. In essence, the association of education with males puts females in a bind because it then casts them in a male mold.
According to Peters’ thinking, males are expected to be rational, analytical, and objective in their interactions with others. It is these traits that eh author also accords to the educated individuals. As such, the thinking separates men from emotions and instead forwards the view that men must not be nurturing or emotional as such is reserved for females. In this way, the thinking of Peters harms men by limiting their expression of soft aspects such as nurture and care. In general, the reading is chauvinistic and rests upon the assumption of separation of thoughts and emotions, especially for men. The text, therefore, presents a lopsided view of the ideal of an educated person – founding its arguments more on chauvinism than reality.
In the current world, this topic does not hold any relevance. Part of the reason for such is that the curriculum used to impart knowledge on learners today has the input of both male and female scholars. As such, the ideals represented therein are not masculine as they used to be, and feminine aspects are not projected from a male perspective. Essentially, the current body of knowledge cannot deny women the feminine qualities they genuinely possess. The core reason is that the development of knowledge now encompasses the input of both male and female scholars. Further, the intellectual spheres into which individuals are initiated no longer exclude women and their works. Resultantly, the topic that examines the exclusion of women is not as relevant today as it was when it was first published. Finally, educated people, according to Peters, are those initiated into the existing knowledge in society; today, there is unlimited access to knowledge of different disciplines from multiple perspectives. As such, the newly educated, are initiated into a more egalitarian view of the world. They neither possess a masculine nor chauvinistic view.
References
Martin, J. R. (1981). The Ideal of the Educated Person. Educational Theory, (31), pp. 97-109.
