The role of diction in modern thought

The role of diction in modern thought is made very obvious by studying Freud. The phallocentric framing of sexuality seemed to deny the feminine sex altogether. Rather, femininity was understood only as a complement to masculinity, and the defining attributes of femininity were described as some sort deficiency or atrophy in context to the masculine sex. Freud's theory was validated, or at least given more credence, in the minds of many through his authoritative use of the language of anatomy and physiology. His theory has denied a fuller understanding of female sexuality, and has even defined what femininity is supposed to be through a masculine lens, repressing a fuller expression of female sexuality.

The diction you use, and even the language you speak influences the way you think. That in itself is a fascinating concept. It is interesting to see how Freudian theory was given the authority of science, yet its fallibility is transparent through linguistic analysis. This makes me wonder what other scientific theories may be liable to similar deficiencies. I also think that many of these pitfalls may be avoided through the incorporation of mathematics. Though I have had friends tell me that some professors have claimed that not even our mathematics is objective, I do not see how that can be.

One specific thing Irigaray mentions is that contraception and abortion allows women to choose when to be mothers, challenging the societal doctrine that equates womanhood to motherhood. This challenge to societal doctrine allows the possibility to change the social status of women. However, it seems that the popular media can portray anything from a masculine perspective. Birth control has now been reduced to hormone control, as Sarah Haskins hilariously points out: