Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 20

Sex, Stars, and Studios: A Look at Gendered Educational Practices in Architecture

Author(s): Sherry Ahrentzen and Kathryn H. Anthony


Source: Journal of Architectural Education (1984-), Vol. 47, No. 1 (Sep., 1993), pp. 11-29
Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the Association of Collegiate Schools of
Architecture, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1425224
Accessed: 12/10/2009 23:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Architectural Education (1984-).

http://www.jstor.org

andStudios:
Sex,Stars,
inArchitecture
Practices
A LookatGendered
Educational
SHERRY
AHRENTZEN,
Universityof Wisconsin-Milwaukee
H. ANTHONY,
KATHRYN
Universityof Illinoisat Urbana-Champaign

Educational
researchandtheoryindicatethatmale
andfemaleuniversity
studentsaretreateddifferentlyinthe classroomandthatthe natureof the
curriculum
as wellas the teachingact itselfoften
actions.Archireflectandpromotemale-centered
tecturaleducatorsmustexaminewhethertheir
teachingpracticesandpedagogyare similarly
gendered.Ifso, althoughtheirnumbersin architectureschoolsare increasing,womenmaywellbe
suchpracticesmayprevent
shortchanged.
Further,
the disciplinefromexpandingits influence,potential,andvision.Thisarticleidentifiessituationsin
whichgenderedpracticesoccurin architectural
education,especiallyin designstudiosandjuries.It
also suggestswaysinwhichwe can restructure
our
educationalpracticesto provideenhancedopportunitiesforbothwomenandmen.

IN 1992, MEMBERSOF THE U.S. SENATE BEGAN

attendinga seriesof seminarsfocusedon gender dynamics.Noted scholarssuch as Carol


Gilligan, DeborahTannen, and Sam Keen
gavepresentationson such issuesas the different ethical approachesadopted by boys
andgirls,communicationandmiscommunicationacrossthe sexes,and the effectof the
cult of masculinityon men in Americansociety.1Inspiredby the 1991 ClarenceThomasAnita Hill testimoniesand the subsequent
flurryof media attention on sexualharassment, Senators Al Gore and BarbaraA.
Mikulskiinitiatedthisseries,believingthatit
wastime thatmembersof the Senatebecome
awareof genderedpracticesthat permeate
talk, knowledge, and action in the public
arenaandin everydaylife.
educators
Unfortunately,architectural
havepaid minimalattentionto such gender
dynamicsin the studio, classroom,or curriculum.Educationalresearchin otherdisciplines revealsthat male and female college
studentsaretreateddifferentlyand that the
natureof the curriculumaswell as the teaching act itselfoften reflectand promotemalecenteredactions.2Architecturefacultymust
recognize that our teaching practicesand
pedagogyaresimilarlygendered.Our intention in this articleis to make architectural
educatorsawareof suchgenderededucational

forstudents
practicesandtheirconsequences,
andforthe disciplineitself.
eduEmpiricalstudiesof architectural
cation are few and far between, and at
present,studiesof genderissuesin architecturaleducationareall the morerare.As a result, our premise and argumentshere are
primarilygroundedupon empiricaleducationalresearchin otherdisciplines,and on a
few key studies in architecturaleducation;
commentsof femalearchitectural
educators
thatwereelicitedin a nationwidesurvey;student journalsand surveysof studiopractices
from our two departmentsof architecture;
andourown interpretive
criticismandspeculations,which areinformedby feministresearchand theoreticalthought.Still, we are
onlytouchingthe tip of the iceberg.
Our aims in this article are to eneducatorson the many
lightenarchitectural
issues of gendered teaching practicesthat
havebeengainingprominencein educational
researchand in the media,to providesome
argumentsfor and evidenceof its prevalence
and consequencesin architectural
education,
to encourageinstructorsto investigatethese
issuesin theirown teaching,to substantiate
the need for furtherresearchon theseissues
in architecturaleducation, and to provide
wordsand labelsfor manyfeelingsthat students and faculty experiencebut have not
been able to verbalizeor sharewith others.
Many students, afterreadingdraftsof this
paper,were gratefulfor the articulationof
concernsandfeelingstheyhadexperiencedand the sense that they were not alone.We
hope the ideasheresparkeducatorsand students to take more seriously the consequencesof their daily, often unintentional,

our cultural constructs of masculinity to our


concept of what constitutes a well-educated
person or suitable educational methods.
Conversely, the characteristics that are
deemed feminine are excluded from the concepts of educated people and methods. In a
review of the gendering of the educated person, Janice Roland Martin traces the traits
that American society deems to be the mark
of an educated individual. They are those
that Rousseau, Kant, and Schopenhauer assigned to men by nature (although white and
middle/upper class by implication) and that
Mills contended were denied to women by
culture: rationality, capacity for abstract
thought, self-government, and independence.3 These qualities hold firm in today's
university setting. Ways of knowing that involve personal experience, consciousnessraising, subjectivity, or relational connections-processes culturallyidentified as feminine-are generally considered unacceptable
practices in the upper echelons of higher
education.
It is importantto recognizethat our social constructions of masculine and feminine
are fluid: from one culture to another;within
any culture over time; over the course of one's
life; and among different groups of men and
women, depending on class, race, ethnicity,
and sexualorientation.We must constantlybe
aware of how society treats gender and how
we may inadvertentlyreinforceit.
Genderization also deals with issues of
power: who wields power, how power is attained, in what forms, and who decides what
actions, attitudes, and products are labeled
male or female and subsequently dominant/
normative or subordinate/deviant. Gender is
actions.
not sex-that is, biological differences-and
should not be construed as the property of
individuals.Rather,gender reflectshow social
Genderizationin ArchitecturalEducation expectations and beliefs treat the biological
characteristics of sex to form a system of
What does it meanto have"gendered"
edu- domination and subordination, privilege and
cationalpractices?
Genderization
is attaching restraint. Domination does not necessarily
1 1

Ahrentzenand Anthony

haveto be as overtas physicaloppression;it


can be as pervasivelysubtle as silencing an
voice in text,display,or classdisindividual's

Percentage of Bachelors, Master's, Doctorate and Professional Degrees


Awarded to Women
in Selected Fields, 1987
(U.S. Department

cussion.

of Commerce,

1990)

Individualsarenot seen simplyby the


natureof theirsex.They maybe seenas individualswho are also cast as social actorsof
Masters
Doctorate
I Bachelors
| D| egrees
Degrees
Degrees
class,race,ethnicity,age, sexualorientation,
11 51.5% 11 51.2% |l
35.2% 1
and region,aswell as gender.Contemporary AllDisciplines
! II
I
I
!
it
feministthoughtdemandsthatwe consider
30.1
9sw
2
and NaturalResources
31.2
|
Agriculture
30.1
1I
I! i 17.0
how class,race,ethnicity,age,sexualorienta34.0.
28.3
37.3
Architecture&EnvironmentalDesign
|
|II
I
I1
tion, and other traitsintersectwith gender.
33.0
23.6
46.5
Business
& Management
|
I|
i!
I!
Our culturalconstructsof masculinityare
29.4
34.6
II 13.9
II
Computer & Information Science
1
1
differentfor a Euro-American
malethan for
24.0
Ii
I........
I
Dentistry (DDS or DMD)
an African American male, for example.
6.9
12.6
13.7
I
I
Engineering
11
Theseintersections
arecomplicatedandintri40.2!
Law (LLBor JD)
I||11
cate;yet at timesin thisarticlewe mayappear
48.7
48.5
LifeSciences11
II 35.0
1
to overlook them. It is simply for lack of
46.4
Mathematics
|I
II 39.1 II 17.4
Medicine(MD)
IL 32.4
I
space,not for lackof awarenessor concern,
1-l
thatwe engagein thesesimplifications
here.
28.4
17.3
II 24.9
I|
Physical Sciences
I
1
68.0
PublicAffairsI
II 63.7 11 45.7..
Althoughwomen areparticipatingin
19.3
the field of architecturein increasingnumI
II
Theology (BD, M. Div., MHL)
.I
bers,theyaremakinglessprogressin termsof
1. Atthe timeof thiswriting,these werethe best statisticsavailable
thatshowthe percentagesof
womenawardeddegreesinvariousfields.Thesestatisticsdo notseparatearchitecture
fromallied
leadership,empowerment,and retention,or
designdisciplines.As a result,the percentagesof womenwhoreceiveddegreesinarchitecture
may
in termsof affectingthe built environment
be less thanwhatis reflectedhere.
and the practiceof architecture.Compared
to their representation in other fields,
women'spresencein the architectural
profesINARCHITECTURAL
STUDENTS
EDUCATION
sion has lagged(Figures1-3).4 Why?Some
(NAAB, 1990)
claimit is becauseof women'spsychological,
However,
cognitive,andanalyticincapacities.
severalresearchreviewsfind no differences
betweenmen andwomenin spatialvisualization, only moderateadvantagesfor men in
.
i ,..,b.
..
US& iwii:i.t
f.II.
tu4s~:int
spatialperceptionof horizontality/verticality
and mental rotation, and small sex differencesin mathematical
We beM.Arch.
||
l
33.3
12.9
50
9.8
||
||
||
4,593
performance.5
lievethatthe socioeducational
contextof the
university-in which the skills,knowledge,
B.Arch
6.2
24.9
||
60
|| 20.0
8,915 ||
and attitudestowardthe practicedevelopBachelor,non||
[
2
.
playsa strongrolein restrictingthe potential
5.3
27.3
18.9
41
professional
12,943
of manywomenin thisfield.It alsoprivileges
UwUY1
the actionsof manymen.
*Includes African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans.
As reports by the Association of
AmericanCollegesdemonstrate,the univer2. Thesestatisticsshowthatwomenreceivedaboutone-third
of allmaster'sdegreesandonein 1990.
quarterof allbachelor'sdegreesinarchitecture
sity climate is a "chilly"one for women.6

17.0

September1993 JAE47/1

12

Percentage

of Women in Selected Male-Dominated


1988
(U.S.Departmentof Commerce, 1990)

Professional
Field_
Mechanical Engineering
CivilEngineering
Dental
Clergy
v
Chemical Engineering
IndustrialEngineering
Arch.tecture
Athletes

..

Law

Percentage 0o
Women
|
3.7%|
6.0 I
8.3 |
8.8 1
12.0 |
|
12.9 |
14.6 }
16.7
1
1

Physician
Computer systemsanalysis,science
Pharmacology
Economist
College/universityfaculty
| Publicofficialsand administrators
I Accounting and auditing

Professions,

|
1

I
1
1

19.3 1
20.0 1
29.5
31.9 I
35.3 1
38.5 I
44.5 1
49.6 |

3. These statistics show the percentages of women in male-dominated professions. Approximately


15 percent of architects are women. This percentage is far lower than that in many other fields.

Similarly,we contendthatthe climateof architectural education for men and for


women, evenwithin the sameschools,is often dramaticallydifferent.At times, the clieducationforwomenis
mateof architectural
indeedchilly.When genderinequitypermeatesthe educationalcontextof the architectural curriculum, it diminishes the
educationaldevelopmentof manywomen.It
also retardsthe progressof the discipline,
makingit all the more difficultto open up
new avenuesfor differentperspectives,criticism,andthought.
A Curriculumof Great Men and Great
Monuments:Male-CenteredConcepts
of Precedent and Mastery
Architectural
theorydoes not meditate
the
upon
possibility of the genderizationof architectural
activityincluditself.
Architectural
theorydoesnot
ing
of
this
issueas essenconscious
appear
tial to its self-understanding-and
thusgermaneto maleor female,practitioneror theoristaswell.This relative
absenceof theoreticalreflectionfindsa
practical counterpart in the male
dominance-both ethicaland statistical-among the starsof the profession.
-Ann Bergren7
of
Exemplars-of architectand architecture,
in
held
esteem
and
high
person product-are
in schools of architecture,so much so that
they directmuch of the curriculum.Howtheseexemplars
ever,the basisforestablishing
is ill-defined.Undersuch conditions,exemplarsbecomeicons.As somehaveargued,architecturehasa limitedknowledgeparadigm,
or as SharonSuttonlaments,"areservoirof
knowledgeaboutthe builtenvironment":

of
4. Mostarchitectural
historybooksignorethe contributions
women.Thereasonsforthisare complex.Itis hopedthatfuture
textbookswillbe different.(Credit:
Chavan)
Abhijeet

The goalof creatinga knowledgebase


forthe fieldremainsunachieved
largely
13

andAnthony
Ahrentzen

becausearchitectural
researchcontinues to be dwarfedby a HowardRoark
visionof professional
practice.In comto
parison engineering-another applied field that relatively recently
adoptedadvanced,theoreticalstudyarchitecture
is not evenon the map.8
With an ill-defined foundation of
knowing, reasoning,even reflecting-in-action, masterybecomeslegitimatelydefined
do. Mastersaremaleby whatthe "masters"
centerednomenclatures,
witnessedby who is
labeleda genius,how one becomessuch,and
what casesare consideredto be exemplars
andprecedents.
Forexample,one methodof designating designexcellenceis referenceto "historical precedent."However, history in most
disciplinesis a genderedconstructionof what
students
happenedin the past.9Architecture
areusuallypresentedwith a historyin which
womendo not appearandin whichwomen's
particularcontributionsarenot recognized
(Figure4). Mostwomenremainspectatorsin
A
popularversionsof bothpastandpresent.?1
look at architectural
textbooks
reveals
history
little mentionof women and theircontributions to the builtlandscape.1We mightreasonably assume that most syllabi of
architecturalhistory courses also neglect
women.
Does thisabsencein ourtextsandcurriculummean that women did not participatein the creationof the builtenvironment?
No. Femaleabsencein architectural
history
andprecedenceresultsfromthe definitionsof
architectureand architectestablishedby the
gatekeepersof this history:instructors,writWe suggestthat archiers,and publishers.12
tecturalexemplarshavebeen definedlargely
by the notionsof the activityof design,that
is, whatthe designerdoes,alone,at the drawing board3;the typeof commission;and the
a Westernmaleof priviarchitect,principally

legededucationbackground.Fallingoutside
theseboundaries,however,aremany,many
women who have designedand developed
ourbuiltlandscape.
Recent historical investigations of
women in architecture"documentthe discriminationthathas keptwomen out of the
architecture
schoolsand offices.They show,
however,that despiteovert discrimination
and culturalprejudicewomen havebecome
architectsand that they designednot only
houses but commercial and civic buildbuilders,
ings.... Theyhavebeencontractors,
and engineers.These professionalwomen
challengedthe culturalassumptionsabout
woman'srole."'4
Forexample,DianeFavro'sanalysisof
the workand practiceof JuliaMorgandemonstratesthat Morgan'scapabilitiesas a designerand architectural
professionalwereon
parwith those of her male contemporaries.
However, because she was not male, the
commissionsthat she receivedand the publishing of her design work were not of the
samecaliberandprominenceof thosedistinguishinghermalearchitectural
colleagues.As
Favroconcludes:
Morgan'sworkat the Ecolewas every
bit as object-orientedand style-conscious as her peers.What she lacked
was opportunity.Armedwith her diplomafromthe Ecole,Morgansought
professionalvalidation,yet foundherself by gender in the position of an
outsider.She displayedobviousskillas
a designerand engineer,yet was often
givencommissionsbecauseof preconceptions about femalesensitivity.In
responseto existing preconceptions,
she fashioneda non-threateningprofessionalimageanda workphilosophy
of accommodation.Marginalizedby
the professionand contemporary
mores,she reliedupon internalrewards.

September1993 JAE47/1

14

When asked what kind of approval


Morgan sought during her career,
formeremployeeCoblentzresponded,
Herownselfrespect.5
The constructionof architecture's
history reflectsthe firmgrip of the starsystem
on architectural
education.In architecture
as
in otherdisciplines,starsaredefinedin part
by theirsex. ChristineBattersbyarguesthat
the contemporarymeaningof geniusin the
artworldsis rootedin the periodof romanticism in which genius was redefined as a
sexed-that is, male-person, endowedwith
characteristics
of imagination,intuition,feeling, andevenmentalinstability-characteristics, ironically,thathad beenassociatedwith
the concept "feminine."16Women were not

recognizedas potential geniuseseven with


thesequalities,simplybecausetheywerenot
men. Exceptionalmen, however,could take
on femininecharacteristics
withoutimpairing
theirmasculinity.17
Architectural
educatorsmustcritically
those
who
label
andidentifythestars
question
or geniusesandthe processby whichtheydo
so to unveilthe politicaland genderedpracticesin gatekeeping
andstargazing.18
We must
the
notion
of
demystify
masteryby critically
questioninghow one becomesa master.Further,as Battersbysuggests,we must redefine
masteryso thatit consistently-andnot selectively-incorporates the social experiences
andsituationsof differenttypesof peoplewho
createarchitecture.
Generally,white male architectsare
treatedas if theirsexand racewereutterlyirrelevantto theirwork.Butthisneednot be so.
Forexample,a GeorgetownUniversitycourse
that examines the works of Hawthorne,
Melville, Cooper, and Twain is entitled
"WhiteMaleWriters."Sucha coursewould
usuallybe labeled"Mastersof AmericanLitwhileworksby womenandminority
erature,"
groupswouldbe taggedby sex or raceof the

authors.The Georgetowncoursehighlights
the factthatsexand raceaffectauthors'literandartisticcreations.19
arystrategies
The exclusionof the femalefrom architecturalmasteryis alsothe resultof limiting the definition of what architectureand
architectural
practiceis. ArchitecturalhistorianKarenKingsleyclaimsthat the standard
architectural
history/theorysyllabususesthe
"greatmonuments, great men" approach,
one that isolatesand objectifiesthe designer
and the work.20Not only does it ignore
women'scontributionsto the built environment,but alsoit ignoresor minimizescontributions other than that of the "drawing
board" aspect of design. Architectural
gatekeepersfocus their lens on the single,
shiningstarsand not the constellationscomposed of planets. Consequently,students,
and the generalpublic,receivean unrealistic
viewof the profession.
Until recently,women and women's
contributionswerenot includedin architecturalhistorytexts.Kingsleyclaimsthatsome
textbooks have made efforts to include
"WomenWorthies,"thatis, women"worthy
of inclusion"as definedwithin traditional,
maleimagesof excellence.Thesearethe "exceptionalwomen"that GwendolynWright
describes,whose dedicationto and determination in the field was greaterthan that of
many men and who sometimeswere more
Forexprolificthantheirmalecounterparts.
ample, Julia Morgan designed more than
eighthundredbuildings.Ironically,Kingsley
claimsthatKennethFrampton'sModemArchitecture:
A CriticalHistoryis the most gender-inclusive
historytext,mentioninga grand
total of fourwomen:GertrudeJekyll,Charlotte Perriand, Margaret MacDonald
Macintosh,andLillyReich.
The small number of women architectsmentionedin suchtextsreflectsthe facts
that,comparedto men,womenhavehadless
educaopportunityto receivean architectural

tion and that few womenhavebeenpracticing architectsor designers,a definingqualification to be "notable."Furthermore,while


booksand monographson femalearchitects
haveonly recentlyappeared,manysuchpublicationshavebeengenerallydismissedin the
architectural
historyjournalsandreviews.22
Another reasonfor women's relative
absence,suggestedby Kingsley,is that collaborationhasnot beena definingcharacteristic of "good"architecture,even though it
liesat theveryfoundationof design,development,andconstruction.
Collaborationcontradictsa belief in
personalchoiceand individual,creativefreedom, that is, becoming a successon one's
merits-a standardof excellencein a fielddefinedby "starchitects."
Withinsucha context,
collaboration
is oftennegatedor altogether
ignored, and the contributionsof men overshadowthoseof women.The awardingof the
Prizesolelyto ar1991 PritzkerArchitectural
chitectRobertVenturiignoredthe contributions of his partners,notablyDenise Scott
Brown.Venturicommentedon thisomission
when he acknowledgedthe award:"It'sa bit
of a disappointmentthat the Prizedidn'tgo
to me and Denise Scott Brown,becausewe
aremarriednot onlyas individuals,
but as designers and architects."23On the day that the

awardwas announced,Denise Scott Brown


commentedat a plenarysessionof the annual
conferenceof theACSAthat"they[thearchitecturalgatekeepers]
don'tknowhow to have
a mom-and-pop guru."24

When collaborative efforts are acknowledged,historiansappearto valuecertain roles over others. When women have
with otherarchitects,theirroles
collaborated
have been deemedmarginalto the finished
product, or even worse, their efforts have
beeninappropriately
attributedto theirmale
collaborators.Another example is Truus
Schr6der'sparticipationin the designof her
house, the Rietveld Schroder house in

15

Ahrentzen
andAnthony

Utrecht,Holland.Althoughearlierrecords
reporther as codesigner,her contributionis
oftenforgottentoday.Her conceptualization
of familylife in herhome, of celebratingthe
ritualsof the everyday,led to her insistence
that everyspacein her house be dividedby
slidingor foldingpartitions.Her enthusiasm
for this modernidiomprecededhermeeting
with architectGarritRietveld.As he later
wrote to her: "You strew the world with
ideas;they say I'm a man with many ideas,
but you have far more. I sweep them up
around you. And they're not just any old
ideas;they have direction.You are not the
slightestbit interestedin how somethingis to
be achieved.You shouldn'ttry to be either.
We must go on working as a team."25

Anne GriswoldTyng claimsthat anothercontributoryrole of women has been


that of museto the malearchitect:inspiring
and evencontributingto the architect'sidea,
but never being recognized or acknowlThosewho writeaboutand teacharedged.26
chitectural history must even question
women'scomplicityin this roleas muse,especially during an era when women were
discouragedfrom claiming credit for their
contributions.In some cases,women were
not even allowed to do so. If Felix
Mendelsohn'ssister Fanny was persuaded
not to claimauthorshipof her musicalcompositions,affixinginsteadherbrother'sname
to her own work, is it that unlikely that
MarionMahonyGriffinwassimilarlynot allowedto acknowledgepubliclyhercontributions to the development of the Prairie
Schoolstyleandform,whichwereinsteadattributedto FrankLloydWright?
Feminist thought has also been
marginalizedor ignoredin the architectural
discipline.This lackof feministconsciousness
is due in partto the smallnumberof women
in the field, their academictraining, their
relativelackof powerin decision-making
capacities,and, most importantly,to the ten-

sion between the practice of architecture faculty assesswhether their teaching practices
TEACHING
PRACTICES
QUESTIONING
within a capitalist, patriarchaleconomy and and course curriculum are male-centered, as
THATPROMOTE
MALE-CENTERED
IDEAS
ANDPRECEDENT
OFMASTERY
the discipline of architecture,which is to em- we have suggestedin this section.
brace knowledge and criticism of the social
aspart
Arewomen'scontributions
(asindividuals,
production of the built environment.
orgroup)to the
of a team,orasanassociation
Nonetheless, recent scholars in archi- The Mister-Mastery-Mystery
In ourcurricubuiltlandscape
acknowledged?
tectural criticism are proposing new ways to Phenomenon
lum,do we reference
parks,places,
buildings,
look at body, sexuality,sex, power, and place.
and so on that are not only designedby
fiwomen,butalsopromoted,programmed,
For example, Elizabeth Grosz challenges Any carefulexamination of architecturaleduthem?
or
advocated
nanced,
by
phallocentrism in urban design theories as cation must measureits pulse: the design stuDo we take into accountcontributionsand
"not so much the dominance of the phallus dio. The studio is a frequent topic of
of womenandmenrelativeto
achievements
as the pervasive unacknowledged use of the conversation among architecture students,
andgenresof thetimesandculthetraditions
male or masculine to represent the human. and it is a crucialpart of their daily lives.
turesin whichtheylived?
drawnfromthelives
Areexamples
andanecdotes
A decade ago, Chris Argyris identified
The problem, then, is not so much to elimiof bothmenandwomen?
nate as to reveal the masculinity inherent in the "mastery-mystery"syndrome supporting
In ourcurriculum,
do we excluderegions,counthe notion of the universal, the generic hu- design studio education, in which instructors
tries,timeperiods,buildingtypes,andsettings
man, or the unspecified subject."27
rarely help students recognize the ideas and
in whichwomenmadesignificantcontribuworks
theoriesdesign decisions.30In this context, the
to
those
tionsto thebuiltlandscape?
supporting
Compared
on theprocessof creatDo we focustoonarrowly
in architecturaltheory, feminist efforts are re- student begins to believethat mysteryis an inDo we implicitly
ingourbuiltenvironment?
active measures to our gendered built land- dication of the mastery of the instructor. Althatclients,epochs,patrons,
users,desuggest
as the design of though Argyrishas many concerns about this
scape and society-such
to thefororcontribute
etc.constrain
velopers,
shelters for battered women, which, while mode of teaching, he stops short of questionmationof thebuiltlandscape?
Do we criticallyassesshowgatekeepers
(instrucshelteringand supportingabusedwomen and ing the sexist nature of the syndrome itself.
andso on)labelor
editors,
tors,texts,magazine
children, the shelter itself does nothing to After all, masters-those who teach the upto be a commendidentifywhatis considered
eliminate male violence againstwomen in the per-level (that is, prestigious)studios-are alablebuilding,landscape,architect,creator,
home. Proactivefeminist efforts in architec- most alwaysmisters.In many cases, as Argyris
orplace?
contributor,
ture seek to subvert societal and building in- suggests, they assume this position with little
dustry efforts that gender space and built questioning of their motives. The master-ap- 5. Ourcurriculum
ideasaboutthe
mayembedmale-centered
form. An example is Marsha Ritzdorfs work prenticemodel that is reinforcedin the design natureof architecture.
Thesequestionsmayhelpinstructors
discoverwhetheror notgenderedperspectivespermeatethe
with citizen groups in rewriting zoning ordi- studio is highly patriarchal.
andstructureof theircourses.
curriculum
Like the studio, the design jury is a
nances to create gender-sensitive land reform.28Another example is Matrix Architects fundamental component of architectural
Ltd., a multiracial women's architectural education. To many students, it is both the
practice in Britain, whose aim is to reshape most feared and the most reveredpart of the male, we rarelyif ever see juries in which all
power relationshipsbetween the "expert"and academic term. At many schools, what hap- jurors are female. As a result, the image of
the "layperson"by allowing female clients to pens in the design jury bears a strong influ- men as "masters"is again strongly reinforced.
be involved at every stage of the design pro- ence on students' course grades. At stake are
Findings from surveysof 629 architeccess. In projects such as the Jagonari Educa- not only students' design ideas, but also their ture students from ninety-two schools revealed a high degree of dissatisfaction with
tional Resource Centre for Asian Women in careersas students and future practitioners.
As a result, students often place ex- juries. Compared to men, women are signifiEast London and Harlow Women's Aid
cantly more dissatisfied with design juries,
Centre, Matrixworked with the clients in the traordinaryimportance on the jurors-"the
the
most
At
Gods"-themselves.
eduthe
of
schools,
and
design studios, design education, and archibuildings,
production
design
on
tectural education in general (Figure
or
includes
to
and
men,
only
perhaps
attempting empower typicaljury
cating, training,
occasion, a token woman. Although we see a 6).31Manywomen stress that the public nathem as the building processevolved.29
Figure 5 lists several questions to help vast number of juries in which all jurors are ture of the jury, especiallyits often fiercepub-

September1993 JAE47/1

16

STUDENTS' RESPONSES TO:


HOWSATISFIED OR DISSATISFIEDARE YOU
BREAKDOWNBY SEX
Architecturaleducation* -

2.2

,men

2.5

women

Design education* -

2.6

2.3
2.5

Design studios* -

2.9

2.68

Interimjuries* -

2.8

3.0

2.8

Juries in general* -

2.95

Finaljuries -

3.0

very
satisfied
*p < .05

male students may well view the jury as maintains


its competitivestructure;
it doesnot
reconstruct
the
one
social
more
or
battle
to
be
won.
the
lives of
contrast,
By
system
just
to manywomen students,thiswarriormen- peopleembeddedin thatsystem.
tality is truly foreign, causing them to feel all
Many feministscontend that one of
the moreself-conscious
at thejury.
the purposesof work is to use cooperation
The traditionaldesignjuryprocessdis- andcollaboration
to enhancehumanconnecrelaand
tion
and
hierarchical,
playsrigid,
patriarchal
potential.Educatorswho arecombetween
students
and
In
mitted
to
the creationof a morecooperative
faculty.
tionships
fact,designjuriesand studioscan be viewed worldand to democraticpracticesthat help
in termsof the "corporate"
culturesthey re- achieveequalitymustseekchangesin the soflect.Accordingto the criteriaestablishedby cialstructureof theirclasses.Studentscanbe
TerrenceE. Deal and AllanA. Kennedyin taughtto viewarchitecture-andthe signifitheirbook, Corporate
Cultures:TheRitesand cant casts of characterswithin the disciRitualsof Corporate
Life,designeducationis pline-as constellationsratherthan solitary
most closelyrelatedto the tough-guy,macho stars.They need not be taughtsimplyto adculture,as it is dominatedby internalcompe- mirethe starsfrom below.A numberof extitionto becomea star,to gambleor riskbold amples of participatory studio teaching
structuresthatcreatea lesshierarchical,
more
ideas, and to take chances.35
No systematic, empirical evidence collaborativemilieu are given in Thomas
thatthiscompetitive,hierarchi- Dutton'seditedcollection,Voicesin Architecdemonstrates
calatmosphereis necessaryforthe trainingof turalEducation.37
This is not to suggestthatwe eliminate
professionals.Becauseacademicclimateaffects students' interest, performance,and competitionperse-but thatwe changethe
sense of self-worth,architecturaleducators natureof competition.In TheSecretbetween
must questionwho benefitsand who loses Us, LauraTracyproposesdifferenttypes of
from such a situation. The answer runs competition.38The competition typical in
deeperthan simply deterringwomen from the workplaceis constructedon a masculine
the profession;it alsoperpetuates
the existing model-"warfare without anger"-that is,
sociopoliticalstructureof our professionand open, impersonal,andin accordwith a set of
our economy.Competition,individualism, rulesand a code of ethicsthat manywomen
and externalcontrol are highly embedded have neverlearned.Manywomen compete
values in the corporate workplace. The in waysthataffirminsteadof destroyconneceducationalmilieu that incorporatesthese tionswith eachother.Tracysuggestsmoving
valuessimplyreflects,reinforces,and repro- from negative to affirmativecompetition, in
ducesthe workingsof the culturein whichit whichwinningand communitydo not have
is embedded.
to be separated:
competingagainstthe probBut todaythe workplaceis changing: lem insteadof againstone another.Indeed,
isolatedwork activitiesare increasinglyre- the Latinroot of the word competition
is "to
Hence, a numberof strivetogether."
placedby teamwork.36
educatorsareadvocatingthe teachingof colIn addition,we need to demystifythe
laborative
workskills.However,thisapproach conferenceof authorityon the instructor,
thoseformsof poweror mastery
maysimplyend up helpingstudentsacquire particularly
tools to competewith othersfor scarceem- that arebasedon the teacher'srace,class,or
ployment positions. Simply teaching new gender.Institutionalized
authorityis further
workskillsto betteradvancein theworkforce reinforcedby students'socializedbehavior,

WITH...?many

dlssatisfle
means

6. Findingsfrom surveys of 629 architecture students from


ninety-twoschools found that, compared with men, f
students are less satisfied with design juries, design
design education, and architecturaleducation in gen ersa. ese
of
findings raise serious questions about the gendered nature
architecturaleducation. (Reprintedwith permission frromAnthony,
Design Juries on Trial,p. 240.)

emale

lic criticism, is particularlytroubdlingand


damagingto theirself-esteem.One woman
usedthesewordsto describethe de:vastating
impactof an unsuccessfuldesignjury:"Ifeel
like scum on the earth."32
Many men also complained of feeling
humiliated and demoralized after a design
jury. The potential damage that tlhe design
jury can inflict on both women's and men's
self-esteem should not be overloo ked, as it
can have serious repercussions for tthearchitecturalprofession.As author Glorici Steinem
has recently pointed out, "studies s;howthat
low self-esteem correlateswith both prejudice
and violence-that people who ha\rea negative view of themselves also tendI to view
other people and the world negatively."33
The antagonistic, us-against-them design jury clearly reflects its male orrigins.As
author Sam Keen arguesin his populiarwork,
Fire in the Belly: On Being a Man,,warring
and winning battles have become esstablished
rituals for American males.34Cons(equently,

17

Ahrentzen and Anthony

aboundin bookssuchas EllenPerryBerkeley patience,compromise,and tenacityhavebeandMatildaMcQuaid'seditedcollection,Ar- come necessitiesto the realizationof major
students chitecture:A Placefor Women,and Leslie projects.When askedif women bringto arforallof ourarchitectural
instructive
otherthanwhat
to seewomenassertauthority,and be placed Kanes Weisman's Discriminationby Design.42 chitecturean understanding
whitemalebrings,LosAngein rolesof power,on designjuries,in studios, Manyauthorssupporta feministperspective the mainstream
in architectural les architect Norma Sklarek of Welton
and in decision-makingpositionsin the de- of women's"specialqualities"
in
which
women
and
men
tendto ap- Becketresponded,"Manywomen aremore
the
use
of
this
However,
authority
design
partment.
must be directedto positive social change ply differentvaluesandconcernsto architec- sensitiveto humanneeds.Some malearchiture.43 For example, from reviewing tects-I would not say all, but some-are
andstudentempowerment.40
in regards
researchandprojectsconducted moreconcernedaboutarchitecture
architectural
rather
than
to
seven
Karen
A.
Franck
identifies
concerns,
women,
by
fosteringegocentric
A Fresh Lookat the Question,Do Women qualitiesthatshe believespermeatewomen's architecture for the ultimate user or for
work:(1) a connectionto others, people.... Some of these architectsget a
architectural
Design (Think,Learn)Differently?
to objectsof knowledge,andto theworldand greatdeal of publicity and I think they're
If Tolstoyhad beenborna woman ... a sensitivityto the connectionof categories, more concernedabout publicitythan they
(2) a desire for inclusivenessand a desire are about people."47
VirginiaWoolf
We believethat theseanswersaddress
to overcomeopposingdualities,(3) a responOf late,muchscholarlyandpopularpresshas sibility to respond to the needs of others, the wrong question.Although researchon
focusedon the differentwaysin which men representedby an "ethicof care,"(4) an ac- women's "special qualities" suffers from
andwomenlearnandknow.Indeed,waysof knowledgmentof the valueof everydaylife methodologicaland samplinglimitations,
havepaid
of subjectiv- moreimportantly,suchcontentions
(5) an acceptance
learning,knowing, and structuringexperi- andexperience,
the
basis
to
of
as
for
and
as
a
indience not only varyconsiderably
insufficient
forsuch
effort examining
ity
feelings
strategy knowing
among
and
the
a
an
and
deof
women.
men
and
but
also
between
differences
viduals,
for men,
consequences
part knowing,(6) acceptance
Differencesin how archiIn their noted study of collegewomen, de- sirefor complexity,and (7) an acceptanceof women,andsociety.
tectsknow,learn,design,orworkwithclients
scribedin the book Womens Waysof Know- changeanda desireforflexibility.44
on
have
also
taken
Noted
architects
Field
the
maybe relatedto sex-but not forbiological
Belenky
plural),Mary
ing (notice
and colleaguesdiscoveredthatmanywomen this question of whether or not men and reasons.Instead,they may be the resultsof
connectedratherthanseparatelearn- womendesigndifferently.Forexample,Chi- genderization,the differentlife-long social
"prefer"
ing.41Separatelearning-the foundationof cago architect Diane Legge suggests that positionsof girlsandboys,womenandmen.
our college environments-is isolatedand women do not designdifferentlythan men
Suggestingdifferencesbetweenmen
the basis
women
withoutunderstanding
men
and
than
do
more
conse
but
doubt
and
spend
energy
per
competition;
emphasizes
In the
backfire.
can
for
these
differences
We
accommodate.
to
clients.
"We
and
in
a
nectedlearningoccurs
community
attending
be
architects
female
worst
there's
a
conbefore
a
conflict
to
resolve
cases,
stressesempathyand believingand learning try
may stigmainto parandstereotyped
beforemakingjudgment.College environ- frontation. But women are learning from tized,marginalized,
suited."
are
best
which
roles
"for
conticular
to
be
it's
men
when
ments-and designstudiosandjuries-genthey
necessary
tough,
certain
excel
in
to
will
be
of
Women
stubborn."45
Joan Goody
expected
erally prize objectivity and abstraction, frontational,
or
of
architectural
conin
Boston
Associates
&
practices building
types
competitionand separation.These typesof Goody,Clancy
learningenvironmentsmay be gearedmore tendsthatwomen'sapproach,whichinvolves types,but not in others.As a casein point, a
or stylesof learningthan "awillingnessto discussthe options,evaluate 1989 poll of architectsconductedby Progresto men'sexperiences
the choices,demystifythe process,and share siveArchitecture
magazinefound thatalmost
to manywomen's.
and40 percentof male
female
of
40
the
authorto
undercut
serves
in
the
arises
a
If this is the case, question
decisions,"
percent
that
therewasa difference
architects
believed
architecthe
female
of
the
stuin
architect,making
the architectural
ity
design
pressand
between
architectural
can
that
to
be
seem
ture
than
women?
dio: Do men designdifferently
designdoneby women
"anyone
something
thatwomenarebetbelieved
men.
howand
With
to
do."46
has
been
conducted
research
clients,
no
They
today's complex
Although
to
related
ter
at
traits
of
female
that
the
believes
this
answer
"caring"-housing
design
question, many speculations ever,Goody
and studentsoften questionthe authorityof

female faculty.39In this light, it is especially

September1993 JAE47/1

TEACHING
PRACTICES
QUESTIONING
THATDEVALUE
DIVERSITY
OR
STIGMATIZE
DIFFERENCE
Do we talkaboutandjudgebuildingsor actionsby
referencingmasculineand feminineattributes?
Do we explain to our students the meanings
behindsuch attributions?
Do we allow for multiple avenues for learning,
knowing,and creating?
Do we providestudentsthe opportunityto choose
differentinstructionaland learningmodes?
Do we formstereotypesof femalestudents?of male
students?of theirwork?
Do we questionthe basisforourperceptionsof differencesbetweenmen andwomen?
7. In accepting diversity, we need to question the standards by
which we judge people and their actions, and the basis for making
those judgments. These questions may assist instructors in
questioning their assumptions.

and schools-and men better in design related to power and commerce.48Such stereotypes can only prevent women from
advancingin the architecturalprofession.
Conversely, if women do not design
differently from men of the same class and
social background,we need to ask why this is
so? What are the consequences? Why don't
our social and gendered identities as architects affect the shape of the designed environment? The question we need to ask, then, is
not whether the end product is different
when designed by a woman or a man. Instead, we need to ask how the gendering of
our economy, our building industry in particular, affects the ways in which we practice
and teach architecture and how we act and
react as designers.Does our present socioeconomic structure attempt to shape all of us to
be a certain type of man: a "hired gun"?
How, why, and in what instances does that
role succeed and fail?
Design operates in a culture, one that
directs and rewards certain skills and design
products. Architects, by and large, simply re-

spond to the existing market, and the field is


THENATURE
OF
QUESTIONING
FACULTY-STUDENT
COMMUNICATION by nature reactive. But if architecturetook a
proactive rather than reactive stance-and if
women, as new entrants into the field, did
What number of male versusfemale students do
the same-and if educational practices were
you call on? Which students do you call by
name?
not gendered or homogenized to serve the
With which students (maleor female)do you instatus quo of the male-dominated, male-diteractin classmorefrequently?
Which students
rected profession, how would the practice of
are more likely to ask for a desk crit?How do
architecturebe different?How could the nayou decidewhich studentsto visit duringeach
studio session?How do you decide the schedture of the architecture profession itself
uling of studentsto presenttheirworkbeforea
change by fully exploiting the potentials of
designjury?
both women and men?49
Do interruptionsoccurwhile an individualis talkUntil these larger social structures
ing?If so, who does the interrupting?Who is
educatorsmust recognize that design
At
a
which
change,
interrupted?
design jury,
jurors
and learning "differences"may reflectthe dif(maleor female)generallyrespondfirst?
Is your verbal response to students positive?
ferent worlds in which boys and girls are soIs it the samefor all stuaversive?
encouraging?
cialized as well as our socialized expectations
dents?If not, why?Do femalestudentsreceive
of men and women. Educators need to beas much informal feedback,encouragement,
come more familiarwith the theories and reand
critical
assessment
as
male
students
praise,
for theirdesignprojects?
search that examine such differences.From a
Do you tend to face or addressone section of the
psychoanalytic view, Nancy Chodorow's
studio more than others?Do you establisheye
work is one way to understandhow such difcontactwith certainstudentsmorethanothers?
ferenceshave come to be.50She contends that
What gestures,postures,or facialexpressions
the mothering common in our society is pivdo you use, and arethey differentfor maleand
femalestudents?
otal to the way in which males and females
Do you ask male and female students the same
develop, and to the ways in which they see
kinds of questions?Do you encouragewomen
and relateto the world. Males turn from their
as muchas men to thinkfor themselves?
mothers to independence, solitary endeavor,
Do you sometimesassumethat femalestudentsare
and competition. Females, on the other
uncertainabout their design ideas or are not
much
that
is
worthwhile
because
remain identified with their mothers
hand,
saying
women may tend to statetheirideashesitantly
and develop a complex interdependencewith
or in an "overlypolite"fashion?
others. From a sociological point of view,
Do you, guestcritics,or guestjurorseveruse sexist
Cynthia Fuchs Epstein'swork proposes a difhumorto "spiceup"a dull subjector makedisferent
explanation for such sex differences.51
paragingcommentsabout women as a group?
How does this affectwomenin the classroom?
Individual preferences and choices are temWhen you referto users,clients, or designers,do
pered by the social structure and control
you regularlyreferto malesor use the generic
manifested in schools and other institutions.
he?or the universalman?Or do you referto
These
institutions, as well as the mass media,
both men andwomen?
continue
to encouragewomen to hold stereoAre your patternsof reinforcementdifferent for
maleand femalestudents?
typical views about themselves; women in
turn interpret these views as "real" rather
8. It may be difficultfor design instructors to be aware of the
than socially constructed.
interactionaldynamics in studio. These techniques may help
Figure 7 lists some questions that arfaculty analyze interaction in their classes. (Questions based
on Halland Sandler, Classroom Climate.)
chitecturalfaculty can use to assessthe extent
to which they engage in gender stereotyping.

19

Ahrentzen and Anthony

DoubleSpeak:
Cross-CulturalCommunication?
LinguistDeborahTannensuggeststhat the
communication
stylesof men andwomenare
so different that we should consider their
conversations
to be "cross-cultural
communication."52If so, we need to ask ourselves
whoseculturedominatescommunicationin
the studio and design jury. In this regard,
Figure8 raisessome questionsfor facultyto
consider.
Researchshows that elementaryand
secondaryteacherspay more attention to
boys than girls-that is, they talk more to
them, ask them more questions, ask them
more challenging questions, listen more,
counsel them more, give them more extendeddirections,allowthem moretime to
talk, and criticize,praise,and rewardthem
more frequently.53
Studies of college classroomsshowsimilartrends.In collegeclasses,
male studentstalk more than women, and
women arelesslikelyto be calledon. When
women do speak,they aremorelikelyto be
andlesslikelyto be acceptedand
interrupted
A studyby sociologistsDavidA.
rewarded.54
KarpandWilliamC. Yoelsfoundthatin college classestaught by men, male students
talked three times more than women. In
classestaughtby women, the rateof female
participationincreased,but male students
still talked the majorityof the time.55Anotherstudyof sixtycollegeclassroomsfound
no difference in student participation in
classes taught by women, but in classes
taughtby men,malestudentsmoreofteninitiatedinteraction
with the teacher.56
In addition, researchhas shown that
instructors
givemalestudents
post-secondary
more detailedinstructionson how to complete assignmentson their own, while they
aremorelikelyto completeassignmentsfor
female students. For example, at the U.S.
told
CoastGuardAcademy,whileinstructors
male midshipmenhow to do particularas-

signments,they actuallyperformedthe requiredtasksforfemalemidshipmen.57


Similarsituationsarelikelyto occurin
the designstudioand jury.In reportingthe
resultsof detailedvideotapedobservations
of
at
sessions
three
case
Mark
jury
studyschools,
Frederickson
revealsseveralimportantsources
of genderandracialbias.58
Comparedto male
jurors,femalejurorsreceivelessthantheirfair
shareof total time to comment, they speak
lessoften, and they areinterruptedmoreoften. Comparedto juriesformalestudents,juriesfor femalestudentsareshorter.Female
studentsareinterruptedmore often. Jurors
appearto havea condescendingattitudeand
lowerexpectations
anddemonstrate
coddling
behaviortoward female students. Similar
trendswerefoundfor the waysin whichstudentsof colorexperienced
thejuriesaswell.
Rulesfor talkin collegeclassroomsare
usually anchored in male, white, uppermiddle-classsubcultures.Competitiveverbal
jousting,markingof hierarchies,andwielding control through silencing others-the
verbalmaneuversthat one often findsin allmalegroupsas well as in manycollegeclassrooms-may be alienatingto some women.
By contrast, talk among many women of
tendsto be more
varyingethnicbackgrounds
collaborativeand participatory.Women do
more "interactionwork,"such as nodding
theirheadsand askingquestionsto drawout
speakers.They are more likely to build on
ratherthancontestone another'scomments;
to sharepersonalexperiences,and to regard
conversation
asa cooperative
enterprise.59
The genderingof speechmayalsovary
alonglines of raceand class.VickySpelman
examinedthe racialdimensionsof women's
speech.By examiningdiscussionsin classes
predominantlyof white women, she found
that African American women felt
marginalizedwhen the experiencesof white
women weretakenas the paradigmand the
experiencesof womenof coloras a sourceof
divergence.AfricanAmericanwomen also
September1993 JAE4 7/1

20

felt marginalizedwhen their opinionswere


not challengedduringclassdiscussion.
Concerningthe issue of social class,
communitycollege instructorIra Shor observedthat among working-classstudents,
womentalkedwith moreeasethanmen,feeling it easierto takepublicrisksby engaging
in debate.Reactingto the presenceof a superiormaleinstructor,men'ssilencewasa male
defensiveactagainstthe possiblehumiliation
of being wrong. Going public with their
thoughtswas a threatto theirmaledignity.
Men rationalizedtheirsilenceby sayingthat
womentalkandargueallthe time.60
In a study of twenty award-winning
studio instructorsin Texasarchitecturedepartments,architecturaleducatorsWayne
Attoe and RobertMugerauerstate:"Good
teacherstalk. And talk. And talk. Or so it
seems from their commentaries.They talk
duringdeskcrits,in specialdiscussions,after
class,in lectures.Teachingwell is hardwork,
in part,becauseit demandsthat one talkso
much.We werestruckby the realization
that
this is, in fact,muchof whatstudioteachers
do."61 The type of talk that architectural

teachersdo, and with whom, demandsserious examination.

A pilot studyof architectural


studentteacherinteractionduringthe desk crit revealed some gendered patterns of
communication.Instructorsinteractedwith
men in fairly consistent ways, but with
women theircommunicationpatternswere
more varied.Professorsspent, on average,
roughlyequalamountsof time at deskcrits
with male and female students. However,
when critiquingthe workof femalestudents,
facultywere more likely to spend either a
greatamountof timeorverylittletime.Contrary to what one might expect, faculty
promptedfemale students-that is, asked
them questions-twice as often as malestudents,but theydirectedmalestudents-that
is, showedthem what to do-slightly more
often. Facultywere more likely to reassure

HARASSMENT
SEXUAL
QUESTIONING
Are studentsrequiredto completeall of their design work in studio, thus creatingopportunities for sexualharassmentafterhours?
Do you haveany studiosin which only one or two
femalestudentsarepresent,thus makingit difficult for women to seek peer supportwithin
the studio?
Do femalestudentsexperienceunwantedsexualattention?
Are inappropriatepersonalremarksmade about a
woman'sbody or sexualactivities?
Are femalestudentsforcedto engagein unwanted
touchingor kissing?
Are some male studentsoverlypersistentin wanting sexualattentionfromwomen?
Do men makerepeatedrequestsforsexualactivity?
Do men engagein sexualbanteringor sexualjokes?
Do they leaveobscenemessagesor sexualparaphernaliaon women'sstudiodesks?
Do men put up sexist postersand picturesin studio? Do these postersconveythe messagethat
men view women primarily as sex objects
ratherthanas individualhumanbeings?
Are theresexistgraffitior sexistadvertisementsin
the studio?
Are pseudosurveysabout sexualactivitiesdistributed or discussedin the studio?
Do studentsplay X-ratedand pornographictapes
or moviesin studio?
Arewomen in general,women of particularethnic
groups,women who areheavyor unattractive,
or women who raisewomen'sissuesmade the
butt of jokes?
Arestudentsawarethat sexualharassmentis illegal
in educationalinstitutions?
Are the proceduresfor seekinginformationand filing complaintsknown to all students?To faculty?
9. Here are some techniques to help faculty identifythe extent to
which sexual harassment occurs. Because harassment is likelyto
occur duringevenings and weekends while the instructor is
absent, instructors can also learn about harassment by asking
students to observe and record studio behavior at these times.
(Questions based on Hughes and Sandler, Peer Harassment.)

male students, than female students that they


were on the right track. For both male and
female students, the choreography of the
desk crit-where the teachersstood, how students and instructors moved around the
board-and the rates of praise, remediation,
and criticismswere virtuallyidentical.62

Sexual harassment includes such actions as gender harassment,generalized sexist


remarksor behaviorsto convey insulting, degrading, or sexist attitudes about women, lesbians, and gays; seductivebehavior,unwanted,
inappropriate,and offensive sexual advances;
sexualbribery,the solicitationof sexualactivity
or other sex-linkedbehaviorby promise of rewards; sexual coercion or sexual activity by
Sexual Harassment
threat of punishment; and sexual imposition,
which includes gross sexual imposition, asSexual harassment on college campuses is sault, and rape.64Sexualharassmentrarelyappervasive.63Harassing behaviors occur virtu- pears in an overt, "sledgehammer"manner,
ally everywhere,whether the school is largeor but ratherin subtle, accumulating, and often
small, public or private, vocational or reli- unintentional actions. Although female and
giously affiliated. Harassment on campus is a male college students generallyagree on what
constitutes harassment for most overt sexual
violation of Title IX of the Educational
Amendments Act of 1972. The Equal Em- behaviors,they disagreeon their definitions of
ployment Opportunity Commission defines moderatelevels of harassment.65
sexual harassmentas
Figure 9 raises some key questions for
architecturalfaculty to consider about sexual
unwelcomesexualadvances,requestsfor harassmentin the design studio.66To date, no
sexualfavors,and other verbalor physi- study has focused exclusively on sexual discal conduct of a sexual nature ... when crimination and harassment in architectural
(1) submissionto such conduct is made departments. Nonetheless, a 1990 survey of
either explicitly or implicitly a term or chairpersons and female faculty in architeccondition of an individual's employ- ture departmentsacross the nation addressed
ment; (2) submissionto, or rejectionof, this issue along with severalothers.67
such conduct by an individualis used as
One-quarterof the chairssaid they had
the basis for employment decisions af- received student complaints of sexual harassfecting such individual;or (3) such con- ment in their departments, and 44 percent
duct has the purpose or effect of said they had received student complaints of
substantially interfering with an sexual discrimination. When asked to reflect
individual'swork performanceor creat- on their experiences as students, more than
ing an intimidating,hostile, or offensive one-third of the female faculty surveyed said
that they had experiencedsexual harassment.
workingenvironment.
Students report a variety of incidents
Recent court decisions have embraced of sexual harassment, from being forced to
not only actions and words as potentially ha- hear about the sexual adventures of their
rassing mechanisms, but also posters, photo- male studio-mates, or to listen to "X-rated"
graphs, and graffiti. The Ninth U.S. Circuit audiotapes of sexual encounters or "womanCourt of Appeals claimed in January 1991 hating" music, to being flashed by male stuthat sexual harassmenthad to be viewed from dents. Even male students report that they
the perspective of what a "reasonable wo- often hear other males in studio brag about
man"-not the typical "reasonableman"their sexual conquests and that the later the
would find offensive.
hour, the more graphic the details. Some
21

Ahrentzen and Anthony

malesadmittedthat the tenorof the discussion changesradicallywhen theirfemalestudio-matesleavethe room.68


The ways in which some design students personalize their individual studio
space often is highly offensive to women.
Photographsof women in scantyattirewith
overlyvoluptuousbodieslooming over the
studio desksarenot uncommon.Although
groups of male students may displaytheir
postersas a symbolicformof malebonding,
competingamongthemselvesto seewho can

discussedthe architect's
roleas a 'gentleman's
Anotherstudenttook offenseat
gentleman."'
the commentsof a videonarrationshownin
a designclass.Accordingto the student,the
narratorsuggestedthat designersmake the
user of a space take notice "asif it were a
womanin a negligee."
Many women come from backgrounds and cultures in which women as
sexualbeingsaredominated,humiliated,or
vandalizedby men. In thiscontext,the manner of using sexuallychargedtermsto surdisplay the sexiest "chick," to women this priseand shock, thus promotingone's own
practicecan be highly disruptive.Allowing sense of prestigeand notoriety(not an unsuch sleazystudiodecormerelyunderscores common practice among jurors during a
the myth that women are only sex objects, crit),maybe perceivedasharassment.
not to be taken seriously.69The meta-mesFollowingaresome of the University
to
of
of
Illinois
femalestudents'journalaccounts
sent
"It's
cool
think
is,
sage being
otherformsof harassment:
women as sex symbols." Or, as a graffitimes- addressing
sage on a studio wall claims, "Woman architect is an oxymoron."
The manner in which certainlanguage
is used in the context of the design studio and
jury can also be offensive to women; here,
again, we must recognize that words can be
interpreted differently by women and men.
Some professorsand visiting critics use sexually charged terms to describe and critique
design projects. These words can humiliate
some students and other faculty,who may be
too taken aback or embarrassedto respond to
or question the meaning of what was said.
One of the authors noted the following
double entendres used repeatedlyduring one
three-hour jury session: girdle, tension and
release, organs of interconnection, penetration, and thrust.Along these lines is one University of Illinois student's comment after
hearing a well-known designer speak in class:
"I am outraged [by the language of a visiting
critic]....His language included such colorful
words as 'impotent, inseminate, and penetrate.' He made numerous references to
phallic symbols.... [He] made referenceto architecture as the 'gentlemen's profession,'
talked about a 'gentlemen's agreement,' and

Usually. . . the guysin my studiodiscusswhat they did overthe weekend.


Sometimestheir conversationis not
raunchy,but moretimesthannot it is.
Their topicsrangefroma type of girl
theymet to whattheydid to them.After this, they have to ask eitherof us
[the two females in the studio]
whetherwe'veexperiencedwhat they
or whetherwe
did to their"girlfriend"
like that. It's usuallyone or two guys
[who]do this,but theirstatementsare
disruptiveto ourworkandoutrightoffensive.If you tryto tell themthat,it's
as if it goes in one ear and out the
other.
Recently,one of my studio mateshas
started to pinch my behind. From
whathe says,I am the typeof girlthat
he likes,so this supposedlygiveshim
the rightto grabme!The incidentoccurredtwice, and he hasn't done it
since.This is awful,becauseit seemsso
grade-schoolish.
September1993 JAE47/1

22

When I got to college, things were


worse in the studio/design environment.... I had been askedverypersonal questions before by my male
classmatesin high school, but not as
explicitas in college.I thinkthatstaying up late togetherand working in
the sametype of environmentis conduciveto causingmoredestructivebehavior.I think it also has to do with
the fact that Mommy and Daddy
aren'taroundand can'tbe broughtin
to discipline them.... You'd think
thatwe couldall be adultsby the time
we reachcollege.I don'tknowwhatit
is but as soon as some people get on
theirown, theyregress.
One of the most shocking episodes
disclosedwas that of a femalestudentwho
had beenrapedyearsago in her bedroomby
a fellow architecturestudent, someone she
had believedto be her friend.Althoughshe
disclosedthe incidentto a few closefriends,
shebasicallykeptit a secret.To makematters
worse,shesoonlearnedshewaspregnantand
had an abortion. By contrast, the male in
questionrecountedan entirelydifferentversion of eventsto his friends.Not only did he
bragaboutit duringstudio,but he was also
congratulatedon his most recentconquest.
As a result,the victim spentthe next several
yearsdesperatelytryingto refuteher reputation, as leastto her offender'sfriendsand to
asa "loosewoman."
herstudio-mates,
Becauseshe had been in a relatively
smallclass,heronly optionsto avoidcontact
withherrapistwouldhavebeento transferto
anotherschool or to temporarilywithdraw
from the program.Rejectingthesetwo options and preferringnot to "rockthe boat,"
she ended up sitting only a few feet away
fromher rapistand his friendsin studio for
severalsubsequentterms.Muchasshewould
havepreferredto work at home, her studio
instructorsrequiredall studentsto complete

all of theirworkwithinthe studio.Although


she receivedpsychologicalcounseling, she
continuedto feel trapped,confused,embittered, and enragedin design studio. Years
later,whenshe finallyrevealedhersecretto a
seminarclass,sheexplodedinto tears.
Althoughthe examplecited heremay
be one of the mostextreme,manyof the feelings that this studentexperiencedarecommonplace.It is easyfor femalearchitecture
studentsto feel trappedin studio.To make
mattersworse,manydesigninstructorsdiscouragestudentsfromworkingat home, citing the fact that workingin studio is one of
education.As a
the traditionsof architectural
result,anystudentwho getstiredandwantsto
go home-not an unusualdesireat 3:00 or
4:00 A.M.-is

under strong peer pressure to

"stickit out"and remainin studio.Unfortunately, few campuses today are safe for
womento walkaloneor evenin groupsafter
dark.If womenwish to leave,they must dependon eithera campusescortservice,if one
exists,or theirmalestudiocounterparts-who
often may be too busythemselves-to walk
themhome. Mustthis forceddependencybe
a prerequisite
to an architectural
degree?
Althoughsexualharassmentoccursin
all disciplines,we believethat the cultureof
the studio exacerbatesthesedestructivepatterns. The all-nighter-with no instructor
present-simplymakesit easierforsexualharassmentto occur.We suggestlookingat studio cultureusinga biologicalanalogy:of the
petri dish notion of culture.Named aftera
German bacteriologist, the petri dish is a
shallowdishwith a loose-fittingcoverthatis
usedby biologistsand bacteriologists
to culIn this closed,intense
turemicroorganisms.
system,when positivesubstancesareplaced,
synergisticgrowthresults.Yetthrowin some
pathological bacteria, neglect them, and
watch the scum take over.We need to ask,
Whosecultureis it?In the "petridish design
studio,"whoseculturedominates?Whose is
reproduced?

Many architecturalfaculty and administrators


aresimplyunawareof the consequencesof the sex compositionof studios.
Placinga tokenwomanor two in suchan atmospherenot only may lead to her harassment,but mayalsomakeit moredifficultfor
her to reportsuch incidentsor to seek supthe studioenportfrompeers.Furthermore,
vironmentprovidesa settingfor studentsto
not only mingle and work but also to play
musicthatis potentiallyoffensiveto women.
How manyinstructors
reallyknowwhatgoes
on in the studioafterhours?It is important
to recognizethatsome of the worstepisodes
of peerharassmentoccurwhen men or boys
arein groups,not unlike the typicaldesign

rightback."Somewomenactuallytakepride
in the factthattheycantakeit. This position
further demeans the position of harassed
women. Furthermore,manymen resentattention paid to sexualharassment,as illustratedin a student'scommentfroma studio
survey:"Ibelievesomeof the studentsin studio level especially some of the women
should learn to deal with certain aspects
whichoccurin a mainlymaledominatedstudio. Theirconstantbickeringand tellingfaculty that they don't like what others are
sayingto eachotherin studioonly alienates
themselves.Due to the conditionsof studio
life,I thinkthiswouldrunmuchsmootherif
everyonewould lighten up."74

studio.70

Many cases of sexual harassmentgo


unreported.Many students simply do not
knowwhereto seekinformationor counselproceduresare.71
ing or whatthe appropriate
The reporting process must clearly be
demystified;informationshould be readily
availableconcerningwhereto go and how to
file a complaint.Becausefemalestudentsare
morelikelyto reportsexualharassmentto a
woman outside the harasser'sdepartment,
universitycounselingcentersand studentassistancecentersespeciallyneed to publicize
theseprocedures
to architecture
students.72
Nonetheless,victimizedstudentsmay
not reportsuch incidentsfor fearof retaliation, of not beingbelieved,and of beingaccused of provocation. Many harassed
with
studentswill not discussthe harassment
the harassinginstructoror peer,choosinginsteadto discontinuecontactwith the professor or classmate.In fact, the most common
or the hastrategyis to ignorethe perpetrator
rassingincident.73

Althoughthe majorityof women disapprove of sexually harassing behaviors,


many find the situationto be unavoidable.
Somestudentsaswell as someschooladministratorstakethe attitudethat "boyswill be
boys"or advocatethat"womenshouldgiveit
23

Ahrentzen and Anthony

Conclusions
The Americanethicalcall for equalitystates
thata givenkindof differenceshouldbe irrelevantand that the taskof socialjusticeis to
constructa societyor organizationthat will
guaranteethat this is the case.75In light of
thisstance,whatis the meaningof genderequity,especiallyunderconditionsin whichthe
sexes are not equallysituated?Equity here
does not necessarilymeansimilartreatment,
nordoesit mean"moreof the same."
Insteadof optingfora proposalof gender-freeeducationalpractices,we suggest
thateducationalpracticesbe basedon a gender-sensitiveagenda.We need to transcend
educationalpracticesthat purportedlystress
the abstractandthe disembodied.
We needto
of
the
sex
the
student
whenit is
acknowledge
and
it
when
it is not.
appropriate disregard
of
"the
appropriateness differRecognizing
ence"meanswe need to addressthat today
we live in a culturethat continuesto control
women, defines women as different from
men (thestandard-bearer),
and expectsthem
to act differently.LegalscholarMarthaMinnow proposes"a shift in the paradigmwe
useto conceivedifference,a shiftfroma focus

on the distinctionsbetweenpeopleto a focus tarianwork environmentthat must be held


on the relationshipswithinwhichwe notice to policies of the institution in which it is
and draw distinctions."76 We need to recog- housed.All educationalinstitutions,for exnize that individual students are not only ample, must adhereto federalpolicies on
anddiscrimination.
productsof theirpersonalbiologiesandbiog- sexualharassment
Instructorsmust also pay close attenraphies,but also of theirsocialrelationships
andsocialhistories,thatis, how societytreats tion to the demographic
compositionof their
them.
studios.Studioswith only one or two female
Viewingdifferencein thiswayis to see studentscaninvitetrouble.Withouta critical
differenceas a featureof relationshipsrather massof femalestudents,womenmaybe seen
than traitsresidingin the person.Following as tokensand hencemorereadilythe butt of
this, social arrangementsthat make traits jokes and stereotypes.They are also more
seem to mattermust be suspect,examined, likelyto experiencepeerpressureto become
and targetedfor change.Such a perspective "oneof the boys."Instructorsand adminisdirectsarchitecturaleducatorsto challenge tratorswho enrollstudentsin studiocourses
the socialarrangements
of thestudioandjury must take specialcare to see that a critical
thatleadto sexist,male-centered
actions,and massof womenis presentin eachstudio.79
to restructure
architectural
educationin severalrealms,notablyin reconsideringthe na- RedefiningArchitecture
in theCurriculum
tureof the studio,redefiningarchitecture
in By incorporatinga moreinclusivenotion of
the curriculum,and trainingstudentsto take architectureand precedent,we as educators
the viewpointof the other.
mustaskstudentsto focuson questionsthat
architectural
historianDell Upton proposes:
theNatureof Studio
"Whomakesarchitecture?
UnderwhatconReconsidering
Studentsremainambiguousaboutwhat the ditions?How arearchitectural
ideascreated
studioreallyis or whatit is supposedto be. Is and disseminated?
Who definesthe meaning
it just anotherclassroom?Is it a miniature of architecturalform?"80In transformingand
architectural
education,we must
replicaof an office?Is it a home awayfrom degendering
home or home itself?Is it an extensionof the also focus on what was previouslyseen as a
student'sdormitory,apartment,or fraternity backdrop.We mustadjustourvisionso that
bedroom?If you ask students to describe we can see the world not only throughthe
what the studio meansto them, you find a majormale figuresin the foreground,but
wide rangeof responses.77
Somefeelit should also through the eyes of both female and
be "democratically
controlled"(reflectingthe malefigurestypicallyrelegatedto the backtyrannyof the majorityif needbe);othersbe- ground.81
lievean unregulated
bondingexperienceis esConsciousness-raisingabout gender
sential to their professionaldevelopment. mustbe introducedthroughoutthe curricuThe mannerin whichstudentsdefineandre- lum:not only in textbooksand lectures,but
lateto the studiois eventuallyshapedby the also in design studio projects. Instructors
academicclimate,that is, the waysin which must makeconsciouseffortsto ensurethat
andadministrators
set the tonefor studentsincorporatewomen as prominent
instructors
the studioenvironment.It is the instructors' users of the spaces they design and that
responsibilityto facilitatea conduciveand women'sperspectivesareseen as viabledefairworkenvironment.78
sign directions.The ways in which instrucInstructorsmust convey to students torsselectandpresenta projectassignmentis
thatthe studiois primarilya collective,egali- key.Projectssuchas homelessshelters,transiSeptember1993 JAE47/1

24

tionalhousing,and day-carecentersdemand
thatstudentsaddressfemaleusers.How these
projectsaretreated-day careto enhancethe
lives of workingwomen versusday careto
enhancethe corporation'sabilityto employ
largenumbersof women for low wages,for
example-is alsoimportantin incorporating
feministandcriticalperspectives.
In selecting
forstudentprojects,instructors
pseudoclients
can also make a special effort to seek out
women.JacquelineLeavittdescribesin detail
some examplesfromher own studioexperiencesthathelpsensitizestudentsto genderissues.82

Learningto Take the Viewpointof "theOther"

Another issue is the lack of awareness of


sexual harassment issues on the part of students, faculty, and administrators.Ignorance
about the severityof these issues simply leads
to complacency and satisfactionwith the status quo. Students, faculty, and administrators
must be educated about the definitions of harassment, must know where to draw the line
between what it is and what it is not, and
must understand specific examples and their
consequences. Just as our Senate Judicial
Committee-and
the millions of viewers
who watched the 1991 Clarence ThomasAnita Hill hearings on television-were
forced to take a crashcourse on sexual harassment, so do all those involved in architectural
education need to wake up to this issue.
Speakersfrom units on campus that deal directly with these issues on an everyday basis
should be invited to make presentations to
groups of architectural faculty, administrators, and students. Members of the audience
need the opportunity to ask questions and to
learn about which types of behaviorsare and
are not acceptable.
Architectural students and educators
must go well beyond harassment, however.
They must to be able to acquire the viewpoint of"the other"-that is, those outside

":.'
f:i .... '
....,!ii?,!:i~:~Lii
Si~V'

'|~!!"!~'"
d

Z_and

.
.:."'.":2?.."1
.
.

::

~..
_g

!<'*E.

the dominant circle-thus moving from a


kindof tunnelvisionto a visionof theprofession thatis muchmoreinclusive.Workshops
on such topics as sexualharassmentin the
studioor communicationin thedeskcritand
can helpsensitizeboth studentsand fac| e4jury
%t.
ultywho mayotherwisebe unawareof these
issues.These workshopsshould be directed
not only towardgender,but alsotowardrace
class.Euro-American,
middle-classstudents-be they maleor female-who come
from relativelyhomogeneous,insularcommunitiesareoften not sensitizedto the perspectivesof studentsfrom differentcultures
.?. andsocialclasses.As statedby ShirlBuss:

^!-t2;

.........,.%,

'I>>'4F,*

moststudents
10.Isitpossible
to imagine
anarchitecture
schoolwhererolesarereversed-where
andfacultyarewomen? Unfortunately,
thisphotohadto be staged.(Credit:LeighAnneMcMillen.)

KR

- :'"~F~~ ........~

.....
,i

racismand sexism,but I realizedthat


to many, "women" meant white
women, and that most of the white
women in the programdid not work
to advancethe issuesof racialand culturalsensitivityin the school.In fact,
becauseof theirfragilepositionin the
schoolstructure,theyoftenweremore
competitivewith and hurtfultoward
peopleof color.83

t M_ _
_~~

,e --" ?...."........

?._Y

..

_^_
41faculty
.
.

11. Morefemalestudentsandfacultyareneededto helparchitectural


educationbetterrespondto

inoursociety.(Credit:
thechanging
Turro.)
demographics
Terry
25

...As
a white student with a feminist orientation,I feltmixedloyalties.At first
I didnot want to placea hierarchyon

Ahrentzen
andAnthony

The ACSAcan takethe leadby sponsoring these workshopsat its conferences.


Role-reversal
workshopsarea componentof
manycorporations'diversity-training
packages.One Universityof Illinoisstudentsuggested that students try a role reversalto
attemptto understandwhatwomen experience in architecture school. Perhaps her
wordsput it best(Figures10 and 11):
I wishthatguysin thismajorcouldsee
it from our eyes, just once. For instance:Almost every teacheron the
is a woman.Almostall practitioners are women. Famousrole models are women. Only 15 percent

enrolledin classesaremen. Studioatmosphere is always run from a


woman's perspective. Men are accepted up to a point, but can never
join the "women's club."...If men
could experiencethis, just for a day, I
think discriminatingattitudeswould
changequickly.

draftof this paper.We also appreciatethe


photographic assistance of Jill Eyres, Leigh

Anne McMillen, Jim Stock, and Terry


Turro,and the graphicassistanceof Abhijeet
ChavanandAnneMcDermott.

Notes

A multipronged
attackis neededto ad1. Such workis representedby CarolGilligan,
dressthesecriticalissues.No singleprogram In a DifferentVoice(Cambridge:HarvardUniversity
or workshopsession is enough. Instead, a Press,1982); DeborahTannen, YouJustDon't Undercombinationof coordinatedeventscan help stand: Womenand Men in Conversation(New York:
William Morrow, 1990); Sam Keen, Fire in the Belly:
raisethe collectiveconsciousnessof all those
On Beinga Man (New York:Bantam,1991).
involvedin architectural
education-faculty,
2. Reviews of this research include Myra
administrators,and students.Furthermore, Sadkerand David Sadker,"ConfrontingSexismin the
Power
the field is in desperateneed of more infor- CollegeClassroom,"in Genderin the Classroom:
mation.We hopeoureffortsheresparkinter- and Pedagogy,eds. Susan L. Gabriel and Isaiah
Smithson (Urbana, Ill.:University of Illinois Press,
est amongtheJAEreadersand thatscholars
1990); C. S. Pearson, D. L. Shavlik, and J. G.
will be encouragedto investigatetheseques- Touchton,
Educatingthe Majority:WomenChallenge
tions and to reporttheir findingsin subse- Traditionin HigherEducation(New York:Macmillan,
1989); RobertaM. Hall and BerniceR. Sandler, The
quentissuesof scholarlyjournals.
Climate:A ChillyOneforWomen?
(WashingAs the numbersof womenenteringthe Classroom
ton, D.C.: Project on the Status and Education of
laborforcecontinueto rise,architectural
eduWomen, Association of American
1982);
cationmust makea specialeffortto open its J. K. Ehrhartand BerniceR. Sandler,Colleges, More
Lookingfor
doorsto a morediverseconstituency.Creat- thana Few GoodWomenin TraditionallyMale Fields.
ing an educationalclimatethat is no longer (Washington,D.C.: Projecton the Statusand Education of Women, Association of AmericanColleges,
"chilly"towardwomen may in turn lead to
an environmentthatis welcomingto all stu- 1987).
3. JaniceRoland Martin, "The contradiction
dents-women and men,AfricanAmerican, and the Challengeof the EducatedWoman,"Women's
AsianAmerican,Hispanic,NativeAmerican, StudiesQuarterly19(1-2) (1991): 6-27. The cultural
international
students,and others.The valu- constructof masculinityhas beenstudiedand popularable perspectivesthat these students offer izedof late by a numberof scholarsand authors.For a
reviewof fifteen recent books that examinethe conmay cause us to redefinedramaticallythe structof masculinity,see MichaelKimmel,"Reading
rolesof sex,stars,andstudiosin architectural Men: Men, Masculinity, and
Publishing,"Feminist
education.
Collections
13(1) (1991): 11-17.

Acknowledgments
We appreciatethe critical comments and
suggestionsof Linda Day, PatrickDolan,
Kim Dovey,Jill Eyres,MaryEllen Gibbon,
BradGrant,SharonIrish,AnneMcDermott,
Wendy Meister, Ripal Patel, Lynda
Schneekloth,and two reviewerson an earlier

4. Figure 1 is derivedfrom the U.S. Department of Commercestatistics,1990. Figure2 is based


on figuressuppliedby the NationalArchitecturalAccreditingBoard(NAAB).Figure3 is basedon statistics
compiledby the U.S. Departmentof Commercein the
following document:U.S. Bureauof LaborStatistics,
Employmentand Earnings(Washington, D.C., U.S.
GovernmentPrintingOffice,January1990.)
5. Nancy M. Henley, "Psychologyand Gender,"Signs11(1) (1985): 101-19; JanetShibleyHyde,
and the Psychologyof GenderDiffer"Meta-analyses
ences,"Signs16(1) (1990): 55-73.
September1993 JAE47/1

26

6. Hall and Sandler, Classroom Climate;


Ehrhartand Sandler,A Few GoodWomen.
7. Quoted in Molly Hankwitz,"TheRight to
Rewrite,"InlandArchitect35(1)(1991): 52.
8. SharonE. Sutton, "Power,Knowledge,and
the Art of Leadership,"Progressive
Architecture
73(5)
(1992): 65. Dana Cuff draws similar conclusions,
allianceand legacywith art
claimingthat architecture's
bringsaboutits acceptanceof culturallypluralisticways
of knowingand creating.Dana Cuff,Architecture:
The
MIT Press,1991).
StoryofPractice(Cambridge:
9. As architecturaleducator Anthony Ward
warns:"Architectural
education,like architect,is a socially mediatedphenomenon.Just as there are dominantandsubordinateculturesand formsof knowledge,
so also therearedominantand subordinatetheoriesof
architecture,and these theories cannot be separated
from issuesof power and class."The same argument
can be made for gender. Anthony Ward,
"Biculturalismand CommunityDesign:A Model for
CriticalDesign Education,"in Voicesin Architectural
Education:CulturalPoliticsand Pedagogy,
ed. Thomas
A. Dutton (New York: Bergin & Garvey, 1991) p.
203.
Anotherperspectiveon the samesubject:"The
root problemappearsin all fields and throughoutthe
dominanttradition.It is, simply,thatwhile the majority of humankindwasexcludedfromeducationandthe
makingof what has been calledknowledge,the dominant few not only defined themslevesas the inclusive
kind of human but also as the norm and the ideal."
ElizabethKamarckMinnich, Transforming
Knowledge
Press,1990),pp. 37-38.
(Philadelphia:
TempleUniversity
10. SarahM. Evans,Bornfor Liberty:
A History
Women
in
America
York:
Free
Press,
(New
1989).
of
11. The samedeficiencyis true in manyother
fields. See WinnifredTomm and Gordon Hamilton,
ThePervasive
eds., GenderBiasin Scholarship:
Prejudice
(Waterloo,Ontario,Canada:WilfridLaurierUniversity Press,1988).
12. ArchitecturalhistorianGwendolynWright
providesa briefhistoryof the teachingof architectural
schools.Althoughshe demhistoryin U.S. architecture
onstratesthat differenterashave supporteddifferent
interpretations,viewpoints,values, and structuresof
the teachingof architecturalhistory,each era appears
to be dominatedby the ideologicalapproachesandperhisspectivesof the greatmaleteachersof architectural
tory (for example, Vincent Scully, James Marston
Fitch, James Ackerman, and Walter Creese).
GwendolynWright,"HistoryforArchitects,"TheHis1865toryofHistoryin AmericanSchoolsofArchitecture
1979, ed. GwendolynWrightandJ. Parks(New York:
TempleHoyne BuellCenterfor the Studyof American
Architecture,1990).

13. Cuff, TheStoryofPractice,p. 61.


14. Natalie Kampenand ElizabethGrossman,
Feminismand Methodology:
Dynamicsof Changein the
HistoryofArt and Architecture,working paper 122
(Wellesley, Mass.: Center for Researchon Women,
WellesleyCollege,1983).
15. Diane Favro,"Sincereand Good: The ArchitecturalPracticeof JuliaMorgan,"JournalofArchiResearch9(2)(1992): 125.
tecturalandPlanning
16. Christine Battersby, Genderand Genius:
Towards
a FeministAesthetics
(Bloomington,Ind.:IndianaUniversityPress,1989).
17. This is illustratedin David Van Zanten's
accountof the femininevalues,orientation,and work
of FrankLloyd Wright. In brief, Van Zanten claims
thatWright'senterprisein Oak Parkwasmodeledafter
his mother'sand aunt'sapproachto teachingkindergarten.His objectivewas to teach as well as providea
professionalserviceand to teach throughdesignexercises that were lucid, elastic,and nurturing.This conception of design as nurture is essentiallyfeminine.
However,it eventuallyled him into a conflictbetween
the organizing/urbanand the nurturing/suburban,
which was so frustratingthat in 1909 he eventually
abandonedit-but he did so afterhe produceda distinctiveand publiclyrecognizedbody of architectural
anworkand becamea leadingstarin the architectural
nals. See David Van Zanten, "FrankLloyd Wright's
ProfessionalPracticeand SexualRoles,"
Kindergarten:
in Ellen PerryBerkeleyand Matilda McQuaid, eds.,
A Placefor Women(Washington,D.C.:
Architecture:
SmithsonianInstitutionPress,1989), pp. 55-61.
Archi18. EditorThomas Fisherof Progressive
tecturemagazine,certainlya leadinggatekeeperof the
field, recognizesthe exploitationand damagecreated
by this stargazing:"Theentireprofessionis affectedby
the starsystembecauseit tendsto fostera view among
clients and the public at large that architectureis a
commodity ratherthan an act of discipline, a salable
productratherthan a generativeprocess.Thus, the star
systemnot only destroysthe verystarsit creates,but it
can distort the entire field." However,as he carefully
notes, architecturalstargazing is part of a largercultural system: "Changing a system so closely tied to
popularculture'sfascinationwith personalityand insatiableappetitefor consumableimageswill be difficult."
See ThomasFisher'sEditorial,"StarGazing,"ProgressiveArchitecture73(2)
(1992): 7.
19. "'WhiteMale Writers'Is the Title of English 112,"New YorkTimes,4 Mar. 1991: B4.
20. KarenKingsley,"RethinkingArchitectural
History from a Gender Perspective,"in Dutton, ed.,
Education.
Voicesin Architectural
21. GwendolynWright,"Womenin American
Architecture," in Spiro Kostof, ed., TheArchitect:

Chaptersin the Historyof the Profession,(New York:


OxfordUniversityPress,1977).
22. Kampen and Grossman, Feminism and
Methodology.
23. M. J. C., "Robert Venturi Awarded
PritzkerPrize,"Architecture
80(5) (1991): 21.
24. Commentsby Denise Scott Brownat plenarysessionof the AnnualConferenceof the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, held in
Washington,D.C., in April 1991.
25. See PaulOveryet al. TheRietveldSchrider
House(Cambridge:MIT Press,1988), p. 43. Rietveld's
commentherealso suggestshis subtlemaneuveringin
encouraging her not to participatein the "drawing
board"aspectof design.
26. Anne Griswold Tyng, "From Muse to
Heroine:Towarda Visible CreativeIdentity,"in Berkeleyand McQuaid,eds.,A PlaceforWomen,pp. 17185.
27. Elizabeth Grosz, "Bodies-Cities," in
BeatrizColomina,ed., Sexualityand Space(New York:
PrincetonArchitectural
Press,1991), p. 247. Forother
feminist analyses and criticisms of architectural
thought, see Hankwitz, "Rightto Rewrite";Pauline
Fowler,"Shakingthe Foundations,"Fuse7(5) (1984):
199-204; Colomina, ed. Sexualityand Space;Leslie
KanesWeisman,DiscriminationbyDesign:A Feminist
Critiqueof theMan-MadeEnvironment(Urbana,Ill.:
Universityof IllinoisPress,1992).
28. Admittedly, Ritzdorfis a planner,not an
architect,but then again, that is partof the natureof
narrowlabeling in this professionthat seeks to effect
environmental change in the built landscape. See
MarshaRitzdorf,"Womenandthe City:LandUse and
3(2) (1986): 23-27;
Zoning Issues,"UrbanResources
S. O. Martin,"RisingStars,"
Planning54(9)(1988):6-8.
29. JanieGrote, "Matrix:A RadicalApproach
and Planning
to Architecture,"
JournalofArchitectural
Research
9(2) (1992): 158-68.
30. ChrisArgyris,"Teachingand Learningin
Design Settings," ThePapers,vol. I of Architectural
EducationStudy.Consortiumof EastCoastSchoolsof
Architecture(New York:AndrewW. Mellon Foundation, 1981). The master-mystery
syndromein architecturaleducationwasalsoexaminedin DonaldA. Schin,
The ReflectivePractitioner(New York: Basic Books,
1983).
31. Kathryn H. Anthony, Design Juries on
Trial:TheRenaissance
of theDesignStudio(New York:
Van NostrandReinhold,1991) pp. 35, 240. This book
was intentionallywrittenin nonsexistlanguageto defy
currentgenderstereotypesin architecture.In numerous instancesin both text and graphics,the stereotypical roles of women and men in the profession were
purposelyreversed.
27

Ahrentzen
andAnthony

32. Ibid.,p. 3.
33. GloriaSteinem,Revolution
from Within:A
Book of Self-Esteem(Boston: Little, Brown & Co.,
1992), p.12.
34. Keen,Firein theBelly.
35. TerrenceE. Deal and Allan A. Kennedy,
CorporateCultures:TheRitesand Ritualsof Corporate
Life(Reading,Mass.:Addison-Wesley,1982).
36. For a detailedexaminationof how the architecturalworkplaceis changing,see RobertGutman,
ArchitecturalPractice:A Critical View (New York:
PrincetonArchitectural
Press,1988).
Educa37. Dutton, ed., Voicesin Architectural
tion(New York:Berginand Garvey,1991).
38. LauraTracy, TheSecretbetweenUs:Competition Among Women(Boston: Little, Brown & Co.,
1991).
39. Examplesof this arerepletein ongoing researchby SherryAhrentzenand LindaGroaton female
facultyin architectural
departments.Also see Kathleen
Weiler, "Freireand a Feminist Pedagogy of DifferReview61 (4) (1991): 449ence,"HarvardEducational
74.
40. SeeWeiler,"Freire."
41. MaryFieldBelenkyet al., WomenjWaysof
Knowing:TheDevelopmentof Self, Voice,and Mind
(New York:BasicBooks, 1986).
42. Berkeleyand McQuaid, eds., A Placefor
Women;
Weisman,Discrimination
byDesign.
43. This is often termed relationalor cultural
feminism.
44. KarenA. Franck,"AFeministApproachto
Architecture: Acknowledging Women's Ways of
Knowing,"in Berkeleyand McQuaid,eds.,A Placefor
Women,pp. 201-16.
45. Ellen PerryBerkeley,"Introduction,"in
Berkeleyand McQuaid,eds.,A PlaceforWomen,xix.
46. Idid.,p. xxiii.
NormaSklarek,FAIA,"Ar47. "Conversation:
chitecture
23.
(1985):
California
48. S. Doubilet, "P/AReaderPoll:Women in
Architecture
70 (10) (1989):
Architecture,"Progressive
15-17.
49. Studies on men and women in business
and politics makeus wonder:If the socialstructureof
the building industrywere different,would men and
women chooseto practicearchitecturedifferently?Researchon maleand femalepoliticians,for example,has
documented different driving forces that affect the
waysin which they practicethiercraft(here,theirvoting recordsand legislativeproposals)when in positions
of power.See Ruth B. Mandeland DebraL. Dodson,
"Do Women Officeholders Make a Difference?"in
Paul Ries and Anne J. Stone, eds., The American
Woman,1992-93, (New York:W. W. Norton, 1992).

Also, severalmanagementstudiesdocumentthat men


andwomen in certaingrowthindustriesmanagedifferently: women more democratically (what is called
men with more of the comtransformative
leadership),
mand-and-controlstyle of leadership. See Alice H.
Eaglyand BlairT. Johnson, "Genderand Leadership
Bulletin108(2)
Style:A Meta-analysis,"Psychological
(1990): 233-56; Judy B. Rosener, "WaysWomen
Lead,"HarvardBusinessReview68(6) (1990): 119-25;
"Debate: Ways Men and Women Lead," Harvard
BusinessReview69(1) (1991): 150-60.
50. Nancy Chodorow, The Reproductionof
Mothering(Berkeley:University of CaliforniaPress,
1978).
51. CynthiaFuchsEpstein,DeceptiveDistinctions (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press,
1988).
52. Deborah Tannen, YouJust Don't Understand
53. See IsaiahSmithson,"Introduction:InvestigatingGender,Power,and Pedagogy,"in Gabrieland
Sadkerand
Smithson, eds., Genderin the Classroom;
Sadker, "ConfrontingSexism in the College Classroom.
54. Cheris Kramaraeand PaulaA. Treichler,
"PowerRelationshipsin the Classroom,"in Gabriel
and Smithson, eds., Genderin the Classroom;
Sadker
and Sadker, "Confronting Sexism in the College
Classroom."
55. D. A. KarpandW. C. Yoels,"TheCollege
Classroom:Some Observationson the Meanings of
Student Participation,"Sociologyand SocialResearch
60(4) (July1976):412-39.
56. Sarah Hall Sternglanz and Shirley
Lyberger-Ficek,"SexDifferencesin Student-Teacher
Interactionsin the CollegeClassroom,"SexRoles3(4)
(August1977):345-52.
57. See "WhatIf the AnswersNeeded to Protect Our EnvironmentAre in a Little Girl's Mind?"
AAUWNewsletter
(Feb. 1991): 1.
58. Mark Frederickson,"Genderand Racial
Biasin DesignJuries,"JAE47(1) (Sept. 1993):39-49.
Barrie
59. Tannen, YouJustDon't Understand;
Thorne, Cheris Kramarae,and Nancy Henley, Language, Genderand Society(Rowley Mass.: Newbury
House, 1983); PaulaA Treichlerand CherisKramarae,
"Women'sTalk in the IvoryTower,"Communication
31 (1983): 118-32. Most of the studiesmenQuarterly
tioned herethat examinegenderdifferencesin student
communicationinvolve middle-classculturein fouryearcollegesand universities.
60. Vicky Spelman, "Combating the
Marginalizationof BlackWomen in the Classroom,"
Women'sStudiesQuarterly10(2)(1982): 15-16; Ira

Shor, Critical Teachingand EverydayLife (Boston:


SouthEnd Press,1980).
61. WayneAttoe and RobertMugerauer,"Excellent Studio Teaching in Architecture,"Studiesin
HigherEducation16(1) (1991):48.
62. This observational
studyof student-teacher
interactions during the desk crit was conducted by
graduatestudentsin architectureat Universityof Wisconsin-Milwaukee.Observationswere limited to five
studio instructors (four men and one woman), all
teachingthe samelevel studio. Observationswere undertakenwith a modifiedversionof INTERSECT(Interactionsfor Sex Equity in ClassroomTeaching), a
widely used observationalinstrument developed by
educatorsDavid and MyraSadkerof AmericanUniversity.Observedinstructorreactionsincludeda continuum of teacherreaction that rangedfrom highly
positive (praise)to highly negative(criticism).A short
circuitoccurredwhen the teachertook overa student's
taskinsteadof instructingthe studenton how to comoccurredwhen
pletethe taskhimselfor herself.Prompts
an instructor'scomment indicateda wish for the student to carrysomethingfurther,to elaborateor to examine a new area. Directedcommentswere those in
which the instructorexplicitlytold the studentwhat to
do. For precisedefinitionsand measurementof these
terms,see MyraSadkeret al., Observer's
ManualforInInteractions
tersect:
for SexEquityin Classroom
Teaching
(Andover,Mass.:Network,Inc., n.d.). The study also
found that male faculty tended to spend more time
with male studentsthan with femalestudents.Faculty
were more likely to prompt students of the opposite
sex. Instructorswere more than twice as likely to take
overa studenttaskand do it for thatstudent,insteadof
simplygivingthe studentinstructionson how to complete it, while critiquing the work of students of the
opposite sex. Although all of these findings must be
consideredtentativein light of the small samplesize,
theselatterfindingsshouldbe even moreso, given the
verylow numberof observationsin the female-female
dyad.Copiesof this studycan be obtainedfromSherry
Ahrentzenor HerbChildressat the Universityof Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
63. Male students appearunlikely to be harassed.In some instances,malestudentshavereported
sexualharassmentfromothermen, whereasfemalestudentsrarelyreportsuch behaviorsby otherwomen.
64. Michele A. Paludi and Richard B.
Barickman,Academicand WorkplaceSexualHarassManual(Albany:SUNY Press,1991).
ment:A Resource
65. See LindaJ. Rubin and SherryB. Borgers,
"SexualHarassmentin Universitiesduringthe 1980s,"
SexRoles23(7/8) (1990): 397-411.
66. Figure9 is basedon the followingsource:

September1993 JAE47/1

28

JeanO'BarrHughesand BerniceR. Sandler,PeerHarassment:


HasslesforWomenon Campus,Reportof the
Project on the Status and Education of Women
(Washington,D.C.: Associationof AmericanColleges,
1988).
67. ACSATaskForceon the Statusof Women
in ArchitectureSchools (SherryAhrentzenand Linda
N. Groat,authors),Statusof FacultyWomenin ArchitectureSchools:SurveyResultsand Reocommendations
(Washington,D.C.: Associationof CollegiateSchools
of Architecture,1990).
68. Student comments were elicited from a
seminar course on gender and race in architecture
taught by KathrynH. Anthony, in which students
were asked to keep a diary, recordingtheir thoughts
and feelingsanytimethe issueof genderor racearose,
be it in a studio,a jury,anothercoursein architecture,
or any otherexperienceon or off campus.The course
contained ten femalesand two males. Of the ten females, seven were Caucasian,three were students of
color:two Americansof EastIndiandescent,and one
American of Hispanic descent. See Sheila Thomas,
"BuildingEqual Foundations,"Daily Illini, 29 Sept.
1992: 14.
It is worthnotingthatsomeof the studentsenrolled in this new courseexperiencedwhat journalist
Susan Faludi would call "backlash."(See her recent
book: Susan Faludi, Backlash:The UndeclaredWar
againstAmericanWomen[New York:Crown, 1991].)
Some studentsreportedthat when they werepreregisteringfor the course,at leastone maleprofessorscoffed
at theirchoice, stating,"I could tell you all thereis to
know about that subject in twenty minutes!"Other
studentsreporteda similar"backlash"
from male studio-mates.As one studentreported,"I can only recall
one male studentaskingme what the classwas about.
Everyone else treated the subject of the class as a
joke....WWA is what our class was nicknamed. It
stood for Whining Women in Architecture.Were we
the oneswho werewhining,or was it they?"
69. Note that controlled experiments with
groupsof "normal"college-agemen found that even
for so-called averagegood Joes, exposure to certain
typesof pornographyproducedincreasedlevelsof aggressionand hostilityand an increasedcallousnesstowardwomen. John Stoltenberg,Refusingto Be a Man
(New York:Meridian/PenguinBooks, 1990), p. 141.
Might the after-hoursstudioculture-in its worst-case
analysis-be producingsome of the sameeffects?
70. Hughes and Sandler,PeerHarassment;
J.
Gross,"SchoolsAreNewestArenafor Sex-Harassment
Cases,"New YorkTimes,11 Mar. 1992:A1, A16.
71. Rubin and Borers, SexualHarassmentin
Universities.

72. M. Sullivanand D. I. Bybee,"FemaleStu- ence:Inclusion,Exclusionand AmericanLaw (Ithaca,


dents and Sexual Harassment:What FactorsPredict N.Y.: CornellUniversityPress,1990), p. 15.
77. See Ahrentzen, "Sex, Plugs, and Rock n'
Journalof theNationalAssociation
ReportingBehavior,"
and Counselors
50(2) Roll."
for WomenDeans,Administrators,
78. In reacting to negative faculty criticism
(1987): 11-16.
73. L. P. Cammaert, "How Widespread Is about their activism to amelioraterace problems in
SexualHarassmenton Campus?"InternationalJournals their school, architecturestudents respondedto the
Studies8(4)(1985):388-97.
faculty's question, "Why don't you concentrate on
of Women's
74. This comment is from a 1991 survey of your work,"with "Whydon't you help us rectifythe
and graduatearchitectural
students conditions that arepreventingus from concentrating
290 undergraduate
at Universityof Wisconsin-Milwaukee,askingabout on our work?"Julie Diaz, Shirl Buss, and Sheryl
the physicaland interpersonal
characteristics
of an ideal Tircuit, "BeyondCulturalChauvinism:Broadening
studio and what physicaland interpersonalfactorsin and EnrichingArchitecturalEducation,"in Dutton,
the studiopreventedthem from doing theirbestwork. ed. Voicesin Architectural
Education,p. 137.
Foran analysisof thesecommentson theirstudioenvi79. This point is equallyimportantwhethera
ronments,see SherryAhrentzen,"Sex,Plugs,and Rock man or a womanis teachingthe course.
n' Roll: Students Talk about Life in Studios,"
80. Dell Upton, "ArchitecturalHistory or
(1992).
JAE44(4) (1991): 198.
LandscapeHistory?"
Archimage
a Life
81. Our view concurswith those of numerous
75. MaryCatherineBateson,Composing
femalearchitectural
educatorswho wereinterviewedin a
(New York:Plume, 1989).
76. Martha Minnow, MakingAll the Differ- recentarticle.The authorof this piececoncluded,"The

29

Ahrentzen and Anthony

focus on the individual'star'designerand his or her


curriculumsbuilding-the goalof most architectural
[Deanof Architecprecludesboth [Frances]Halsband's
ture at Pratt Institute in New York] and [Dolores]
Hayden's[Professorof architectureat YaleUniversity]
approaches,which requirea broaderset of intellectual
and collaborativeresponses.Clearlythesewomen and
manyothersareconcernedabout changingmorethan
the opportunitiesfor advancementin academiafor othersof theirsex.They want to transformthe verynature
of pedagogy,and with it, the way architectsapproach
and think about the built environment." Heidi
Landecker,
"WhyAren'tMoreWomenTeachingArchitecture?"
Architecture
80(10)(Oct.1991):23-25.
82. JacquelineLeavitt, "IntroducingGender
into ArchitecturalStudios,"in Dutton, ed. Voicesin
Architectural
Education,pp. 225-48.
83. Diaz, Buss,and Tircuit, "BeyondCultural
Chauvinism,"p. 133.