‘Damaging Discourses’ and Intervention in Discourse



This chapter is in two main sections. The first deals with the theoretical question of whether, and in what sense, discourse(s) can legitimately be characterized as ‘damaging’. The second looks at the related question of feminist intervention in discourse — in particular, the different forms this has taken, and different theoretical approaches here.


Sexual Harassment Student Teacher Teenage Mother Discursive Practice Dominant Discourse 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    This theme has been taken up again recently by Hines (1999) in a paper entitled ‘Rebaking the Pie: The Woman as Dessert Metaphor’.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    See also Candace West’s (2002) ‘Critical comment’ on Baxter’s paper, and Baxter’s dignified reply (both also in Discourse and Society 13/6), in particular in relation to the category gender in Baxter’s study, the use of CA and the value of PDA.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Importantly, these questions are still of practical and theoretical interest, as Anne Pauwels’ Women Changing Language (1998) and Marlis Hellinger and Hadumod Buf3mann’s Gender across Languages: the Linguistic Representation of Women and Men (2001) show; see also Livia (1999).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Jane Sunderland 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Linguistics and Modern English LanguageLancaster UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations