In their article “Complicating Gender Binaries in the English Classroom,” Karen Coats and Roberta Seelinger Trites argue that validating emotions, thinking critically, and eliminating gender binaries in the English classroom will lead to a more purposeful learning of feminism. They do this first, by expounding upon the research of English scholars that support the importance of emotions in learning; second, by offering personal accounts from four teachers with differing backgrounds that explain their positive experiences teaching in the manner in which Coats and Trites present; and lastly, by giving evidence from two young adult novels, including The Hunger Games, that supports teaching novels in which the main characters break gender binaries through empathy and understanding. The purpose of this article is to present the argument that teaching feminism through the lens of empathy and critical thinking can lead to eliminating socially-constructed gender binaries. It is written primarily to English teachers but also to men and women interested in issues of gender and how we may lead the next generation towards the ultimate goal of equality.
As a young woman who has been taught both in a co-ed and all-girls environment and who has taken up an interest in feminist issues, I find this article very interesting in the way it seeks to encourage breaking gender binaries through teaching. I do agree that empathy and critical thinking about social constructs must be present in order to fully grasp the concept of feminism and equality; however, I believe that this article fails to look at the other parts of society from which these ideas grow. For example, often children from a young age through adolescence and into adulthood are inundated with mass media imagery and messages which fully support or even promote inequality. In addition, I believe that the article fails to concede that there may be other ways to successfully teach feminism and breaking gender binaries in the English classroom. It creates a strong argument towards teaching an understanding of empathy and social constructs but does not seem to analyze or note alternative ways of teaching. With all of this analysis, it is also important to note that literature ought not to come second to the political goals in mind. It raises a couple of important questions: Is anything lost in the literature if we focus so much on the gender binaries? Will students lose the ability to understand literature comprehensively if they focus so heavily on the politics? It concerns me that Coats and Trites may be deprioritizing literature to the benefit of the political goal of gender equality. I find both this political goal and a comprehensive understanding of literature to be very important facets of a student’s education; I hope that Coats’ and Trites’ ideas may be expanded to offer a successful balance.
As a young woman who has been taught both in a co-ed and all-girls environment and who has taken up an interest in feminist issues, I find this article very interesting in the way it seeks to encourage breaking gender binaries through teaching. I do agree that empathy and critical thinking about social constructs must be present in order to fully grasp the concept of feminism and equality; however, I believe that this article fails to look at the other parts of society from which these ideas grow. For example, often children from a young age through adolescence and into adulthood are inundated with mass media imagery and messages which fully support or even promote inequality. In addition, I believe that the article fails to concede that there may be other ways to successfully teach feminism and breaking gender binaries in the English classroom. It creates a strong argument towards teaching an understanding of empathy and social constructs but does not seem to analyze or note alternative ways of teaching. With all of this analysis, it is also important to note that literature ought not to come second to the political goals in mind. It raises a couple of important questions: Is anything lost in the literature if we focus so much on the gender binaries? Will students lose the ability to understand literature comprehensively if they focus so heavily on the politics? It concerns me that Coats and Trites may be deprioritizing literature to the benefit of the political goal of gender equality. I find both this political goal and a comprehensive understanding of literature to be very important facets of a student’s education; I hope that Coats’ and Trites’ ideas may be expanded to offer a successful balance.