ColloquyVol.12,Fall2016,pp.66-86

LanguageinPostmodernHorror:ShiftingAwayfromStereotypetoHeroine

RaquelD.MoscozoAbstractThepurposeofthispaperistorhetoricallyanalyzearecentAmericanhorrorfilm,Crimson Peak (2015), using a feminist rhetorical criticism to argue that thepostmodernhorrorfilmgenreismovingawayfromtraditional,stereotypical,andpatriarchalrolesoffemalecharactersinordertoadoptnewidentitiesasheroinesand villains. Although Crimson Peak contains some traditional forms ofpatriarchalideology,ittranscendstheconstrictingboundsofsociallyconstructedidealsofgenderbychallengingtheexpectedbehaviorofwomeninsituationsofdisempowerment. Drawing upon a feminist critique of linguistic practicesconstructed by rhetorician and sociolinguistic scholar Cheris Kramarae, theanalysis of the film suggests that a shift is emerging in the postmodern filmindustry,ashiftthatrepresentsfemalesasbothliberatorsandfoesratherthanthetraditionalroleofwomenasdamselsindistress.

TheuniverseofthecontemporaryAmericanhorrorfilmisanuncertainone, inwhich good and evil, normality and abnormality, reality and illusion becomeindistinguishable(Williams).Contemporaryhorrorfilmsproducedsince1968arelabeled as postmodern and have revolutionized film from early classical torepresentafluxofchange.“Postmodern”hasmanydefinitions;itcanbedefinedasbothahistoricalconditionandcreativestyle.LiteraryscholarAndreasHuyssendefinesmodernism as “a part of a slowly emerging cultural transformation inWestern societies, a change of sensibility” (181). Cultural theorist Todd Gitlinreferstopostmodernismas“anerosionofuniversalcategories,thecollapseoffaithintheinevitabilityofprogress,andthebreakdownofmoralclarities”(353).ArthistorianCraigOwens’sdefinitionofpostmodernismas“acrisisofculturalauthority”(57)bestreflectsthefocusofthisstudy.

Before 1968, during the classical era of horror cinema, the roles femalesplayed compartmentalized their gender and restricted them to stereotypes.Typical female roles, such as the damsel in distress, objectified the femalecharacterandbelittledhercapabilitiestoreflectfragileandhelplessvictims.Suchdisempowered examples canbe observed in films likePsycho (1960), Bride of

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr67

Frankenstein(1935),andKingKong(1933).Traditionally,femalefilmcharacterswererestrictedtotimiddisplaysoffearfulness,dependence,andvulnerabilityasopposed to the typically male killers, who possessed strong, cunning, anddangerous characteristics. As film studies scholar LindaWilliamswrites in herwork,FilmBodies:Gender,Genre,andExcess,“whilemalevictimsinhorrorfilmsmay shudder and screamaswell, it has longbeenadictumof thegenre thatwomenmake the best victims; “Torture thewomen!”was the famous advicegivenbyAlfredHitchcock(13).However,inpostmodernhorrorfilms,womenplaya more prominent role, as the hero—yet, they are still victimized (20). Theconstraintsplaceduponthefemalebodyarelessrestrictiveinpostmodernhorrorfilmsandhighlightfeministcapabilitiesthathelptobringequalityamongstthesexes. Williams notes that in the postmodern world boundaries are blurred,institutionsarecalledintoquestion,traditionalcategoriesarebrokendown,andthemasterstatusoftheuniversalsubjectasmale,Caucasian,andheterosexualhasdeteriorated(17-18).

The film text Crimson Peak (2015), directed by Guillermo del Toro andreleased inOctoberof2015by LegendaryPictures,exemplifiespostmodernistidealsbychallengingtraditionalgenderideologyandpatriarchyinhorrorcinema.AlthoughCrimsonPeakcontainssometraditionalformsofpatriarchalideology,ittranscendstheimprisoningboundsofsociallyconstructedidealsofgenderbychallengingtheexpectedbehaviorofwomeninsituationsofdisempowerment.Fear, violence, and the unknown characterize the horror genre and viewingcharacters in this context reveals the limitationsof thehumanbody. Fear canrender the body powerless and vulnerable, yet it can also create heroes andvillainsoutof characters thathavebeen restrictedand (mis)representedsincethedawnoftechnology.Inhorror,thedamselsindistressarenolongerinneedofsaving;instead,theyareincreasinglycalledupontorescuemenindesperatesituations.

IarguethatCrimsonPeakchallengespatriarchalconstructionsofgenderandcanbereadasafeministtext.Throughthefictionalcharacterspresentedinthefilm, as both the antagonist and the protagonist, a close examination of eachcharacter’s use of language is decoded to uncover if this film text challengestraditional narratives of women in horror films. The film presents a rareopportunity to witness a non-patriarchal story through the presentation ofempoweringfemale-centricnarrativeandcharacterroles.

AlthoughCrimsonPeakisembeddedwithinanentertainmentindustrythatispredominantly male governed, the film possesses significant undertones offeminismthatcanbepersuasive to itsviewers. IhavechosenCrimsonPeak in

68R.D.Moscozo

order to analyze its use of language concerning gender and to critique therhetorical value of communicating gender in a feminist light. I amparticularlyinterestedintherhetoricalconstructionofgenderoftwofemalecharacters,oneas the heroine and the other as the antagonist, in this critique.My aim is touncoverthewaysinwhichthesefemalerepresentationsinfluencehowwomenareunderstoodinlivedreality.Theaudienceofthisessaycanbeanyonewhoisinterestedingenderconstruction,film,orboth,includinghorrorbuffs.However,Ialsowishtoaddressfeminists,rhetoricians,andCommunicationscholarswhoareinterestedinhowlanguagechoicecanshapeadominantideology,orworkagainst it. Horror cinema today presents a rare rhetorical opportunity torepresentafeministperspectivethatispositiveandinspiring.Thisperspectiveisnotnew,butitcanhelpcontributetotheworksofculturalfeministsinrhetoricaltheory and demystify patriarchy by examining the power that language andculturaltextscanhold.

Linguistically, stereotypical notions of gender, (mis)representations ofgender, and patriarchal belief systems are perpetuated through our societalsymbolsystem,whichinfluenceculturalexpectations,standards,andmores.IntheUnitedStates,thegenderwagegapexemplifiesanoppressiveculturalnormand an unequal distribution of social, economic, and political power thatrelegates females to earn less than a man simply because of her sex. Thishegemonicidealofdominationbetweentheoppressedandoppressorrequiresafeministtouch.Thus,itistheworkoffeministrhetoricianstoexaminemediatedtextssuchasfilmsinordertoreadthemessagesthatproduceideasaboutgenderonamainstream level.PerformancestudiesscholarDonnaMarieNuddclaimsthat these communicative receptions influence how widely a text can beinterpretedbyanaudience.ExtendingNudd’sidea,afilmasavisualtexthasthepowertoinfluencemillionssimultaneouslyandmoldindividuals’perceptionsofgenderinbothapositiveandnegativelight.Therefore,CrimsonPeakcanreflecthow gender construction is being produced on a mainstream level, and thisrecentfilmconveyshowsocietalmembersperceivefemalestoday.

Havingintroducedthetopic,thenextsectionincludesthestoryofCrimsonPeakandthecharactersinvolved.Afterthisbriefintroduction,anexplanationofideologyandtheculturalandsocialconstructionsofgenderlaythefoundationofthisrhetoricalcritique.Followingtheliteraturereview,thetheoreticalframeworkincludes an explanation of rhetorical criticism, the feminist perspective, andintroducetheideasofrhetoricalandsociolinguistictheoristCherisKramarae.Thesubsequent section includes the contextof gender inhorror films.Kramarae’srhetoricaloptionofcritiqueoflinguisticpracticesisthenusedtoanalyzeCrimson

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr69

Peak.Adiscussionofthefindingsconcludestheessay.IarguethatCrimsonPeakhasrhetoricalvalueasafeministtexttocommunicateamessageofchangeintheclimateofgenderideologyandpatriarchy.Furthermore,CrimsonPeakrepresentsthe beginning of a shift away from heteronormative traditions found withinclassical horror films and can help inspire future scholars of communicationstudies,rhetoric,andfilmtheorytoadvancefeministbeliefsandbringequalitytoallgenders.CrimsonPeakIbeginbyprovidingabriefbackgroundofthestoryofCrimsonPeak.Fromtheimagination of director Guillermo del Toro, this gothic romance stars MiaWasikowska as Edith Cushing and Jessica Chastain as Lucille Sharpe, the twoleadingladiesofthestory.ThisAmericanstoryisaperiodpiecesetin1901andencompassesundertonesresemblingagothicnovel,suchasthecostuminganddarknessoftheghostlycharacters.

YoungEdithCushing(Wasikowska)isanaspiringauthorwithanambitiontobecome thenextMary Shelley. She liveswithher father inBuffalo,NewYorkduringtheearlytwentiethcenturyandisconsumedbyherpassionforwriting.Afterthelossofhermotheratanearlyage,Edithishauntedbyspirits,includinghermother’s,andisabletocommunicatewiththem.Fromthebeginningofthefilm,wewitness her first ghostly encounter as Edith receives awarning frombeyondthegrave:“BewareofCrimsonPeak.”LiteratureReviewThefollowingliteraturereviewwillincludethefoundationalpartsofthisessay,including a thorough discussion of ideology and the social and culturalconstructionsofgender.

IdeologyProminentliterarytheoristandrhetorician,KennethBurke,viewsliteratureasaform of symbolic action, claiming that “as mediated communication systems,which function via television, films, and the Internet, surround us at everyintersection of Western society…individuals come into an ‘unendingconversation’” (Philosophy 110-11). InBurke’sworkThePhilosophyof LiteraryForm: Studies in Symbolic Action, he explained the idea of a conversation, assomething thatbegan longbeforeanyofuswerebornandwill continue longafterwedie.Burke’smetaphorexplainshowanindividualisbornandsocializedinto theworld—taughtorshownhowtoact,what isappropriate,andwhat is

70R.D.Moscozo

expected.Apersonlearnshowandwhotobebyfollowingtherules,whichwereinplaylongbeforeshe/hearrives(Philosophy).Withexperience,anindividualcanbreakorplaywiththissetofrules,butthisprocessfirstrequiresknowledgeofwhothatpersoncanbe.Thisknowledgesituatestheindividualandhelpshimorherconstruct theirunderstandingof themselveswithinapreexisting realityorconversation.

Ideologiesprovidea lensthroughwhichsocietalmembersviewknowledgeand create social constructions. In turn, a powerful discourse arises thatinfluences a society’s behaviors. Rhetorical theoristWilliam R. Brown definesideologyasa systemof complex symbolic constructionsof theworld inwhichhuman beings “can comprehensively order their experiences” (124). CulturaltheoristStuartHallexplainsthatideologies“originatefrom‘mentalframeworks’that are based on languages, concepts, categories, imagery of thought, andsystemsofrepresentation—whichdifferentclassesandsocialgroupsdeploy inordertomakesenseof,define,figureout,andrenderintelligiblethewaysocietyworks” (29). The “frameworks” described by Hall are the lenses that socialmembersusetoviewrealityandunderstandtheworldaroundthem.Theprimarymeansbywhichideologicalframeworksaredisseminatedisculture,anditisthedirectmeansbywhichindividuals(andgroups)areinfluenced.Societyhasaccesstodifferentmediabywhichtospreadcultureandideologicalframeworks,butforthe sake of this essay, the medium of film will be analyzed for its ability toinfluence social members, extend the dominant discourse, and proliferateideologicalframeworks.

Sincethedawnoffilm,anindustryhasformedaroundit,andthisindustryisresponsibleforpushinganideologicalagenda.Thecultureindustryisatermusedto describe the system of different media that function together to transmitculturalideologies,whichhavebecomeeconomicindustrieswhoseultimategoalistomakeaprofit,undertheguiseofculture.Itisimportanttonotethatfilmisa significant component of the culture industry. In many genres of cinema,misogynic and sexist notions of women have been embedded andcompartmentalizedthroughrolesplayedbycharacters,especiallywhencastedasdamsels indistress.Film,asamasstransmitterofculture, isresponsiblefordisplaying femalecharactersasdependent,vulnerable,andunable to fend forthemselves.Thisrepresentstheviewsofpatriarchalculture.Somemayquestionwhy such a rolewas chosen for the actress to play.However, themajority ofviewerswillnot,becauseitisapartofthedominantframeworkthatisembeddedby the film portion of the culture industry to view women as secondary orsubordinate.Itisnotoutofthenormforwomentobeperceivedasanythingbut

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr71

adamselindistress,becausefilmhasdeeplyembeddedinoursocietythebeliefthatwomenmustdependuponamantosavethem.

Signs and symbols are polysemic, which means that they are highlyinterpretive.However,whentheirmeaningandusagearemoldedbyadominantframework, that framework dictateswho doeswhat. Through this knowledgeacquisition and sense of empowerment, individuals can explainwhat symbolsmeananddetailwhatisexpectedofthemandothers.Forexample,thesaying,“man up” is used interchangeably for men and women to suggest femaledismissal. Using symbols through language systems helps connect culturalmembers to the world, build relationships through interaction, and constructreality.

It is important to note that an ideology does not exist in isolation. Thestructureofasociety’sknowledgebaseisbuiltuponandentangledwithinawebofideologiesthatworktogethertofunctioninthepowerofnumbers;inthisway,they are more influential. Hall claims that chains of association link theseinterconnectedideologiestogether.Hestates:

Ideologies do not operate through single ideas; they operate in discursivechains,inclusters,insemanticfields,indiscursiveformations.Asyouenteran ideological field and pick out any one representation or idea, youimmediately trigger awhole chain of connotative associations. Ideologicalrepresentationsconnote—summon—oneanother.(125-6)

However,ideologiesdonotassumepoweruntilindividualsenactthemandtheirconstruction ismadeareality. It is throughthisactionthat ideologiesbecomeconcrete and occupy cultural space. Ideologically shaping these realities andthought processes acts as a mode of control. Gender and sexuality scholarRosemary Hennessey explains that the material force of ideology reproduceswhat counts as “reality” (21), and if this influence goes unnoticed, it canperpetuateunrealistic,stereotypical,andpatriarchalviewsthatdonotrepresentwomen as equals, but rather, as people to be dominated. This stereotypicaltreatment of women has surfaced in our social and cultural constructions ofgenderwithinWesternsociety,andisfocusofthesubsequentdiscussion.CulturalandSocialConstructionsofGenderIdeologies as described in the previous section communicate knowledge andunderstanding to perpetuate our social expectations of one another withinculture.SociologyandWomen'sStudiesscholarAllanJohnson,inhiswork,The

72R.D.Moscozo

Gender Knot (1995), argues that the ideals ofmale identification are locatedwithinourculturalvaluesinmalenessandmasculinity.Johnsonstates:

In a male identified society the activities of men underscore what ispreferred, normal, and desirable. The qualities commonly associatedwithmasculinity, such as competition, individualism, invulnerability, rationality,andphysicalstrengtharehonored.Thequalitiescommonlyassociatedwithfemininity, such as cooperation, nurturing, emotionality, and care, areundervaluedortrivialized.(6)

Traditionalexpectationsdictatethatwomenshouldremaincalm,sophisticated,and maintain a household. For example, women have been relegated to thedomesticspherewheretheirroleistokeepahomerunningsmoothly,performingas hostess, and taking care of the needs of the husband and children. InDonmoyers’FindingSpace:ACriticismofRhetoricalConstructionoftheFemaleActionHero inFilm (2003),shestates,“puttingwomen in thecharacterof theherocontradictsthesetraditionalroles”(2).Sincecompetition isvalued inourWestern society, being a woman carries expectations of acting feminine;therefore,actingaggressivelywilloftenbemetwithdisapproval,ifnothostility(Johnson6).Challengingtheserigidstereotypesbeginswithcritiquinglanguagechoice,structure,andrecreation.Rhetoricallyanalyzingone’schosen languagecan challenge the status quo to allow rhetors to be, as rhetorician CherisKramaraeputsit,“thievesoflanguage”(Penfield137).

Languageisthegreatestdisseminatorofgenderideologyandpatriarchy.Assuch,alinguisticinterpretationofafilmictextcanbefruitfulinitsrepresentationofWesternculture today.Languageperpetuatesacycleof socialexpectanciesthrough institutions of learning, religious values, home life, media, andfriendships.Withinourcolloquialconversations,wearemeasuredagainsteachotherandconditionedtopointoutthedifferencesbetweeneachsex:“girlsaredumb,”while “boysare smart.”Useof this typeof language ishowdominantculturalinstitutionsreifydominantideasaboutgenderandmaintainthestatusquo.

Westernculture,historicallyandtoday,continuestoreifytheideaofgenderasabinarymodelwithtworigidandstaticoptionsofmaleor female (GenderSpectrum).Notonly is thismodelheteronormative,but italsodismissesotheridentities that are apart from or outside of the male/female binary. Hence,genderandsexarenotinterchangeable.Biologicalsexandgenderaredifferentbecausegenderisnotinherentlyconnectedtoone’sphysicalanatomy.Oursexisdeterminedbyourphysicalattributesandbiologicalmakeupofsexhormones,

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr73

chromosomes,andreproductivestructures.Gender,incontrast,isconnectedtoone’ssenseofself,whetherthatismale,female,orbeyondbinaries,andrelieson an individual’s perception of their identity. Therefore, gender is a sociallyconstructedconceptmuchlikerace.Genderedexpectationsandideologiesareplaceduponourpersonhoodfromanearlyage.Forexample,themajorityofgirlsacrossmanyculturesarebroughtuptoplaywithdolls(objectsthatarebeautifulandquiet,muchliketheexpectationsthatwomenareprescribedtofollow),whileboyshaveanunlimitedchoiceoftoys.However,boysareencouragednottoplaywith toys that are associated with feminine qualities (kitchen sets, makeup,and/orplaying“dressingup”).AsnotedinanarticlebyGenderSpectrum,

Throughacombinationofsocialconditioningandpersonalpreference,byagethree most children prefer activities and exhibit behaviors typicallyassociatedwiththeirsex.Acceptedsocialgenderrolesandexpectationsaresoentrenchedinourculturethatmostpeoplecannotimagineanyotherway.Asa result, individuals fittingneatly intotheseexpectationsrarely, ifever,questionwhatgenderreallymeans.Theyneverhadto,becausethesystemhasworkedforthem.(1)

Evidently,genderisoneoftheprimarywaysthatwedeterminesocialbehavior,butitisimportanttonotethatascomplexbeings,weuseidentitiestointeractintheworld,andgenderdoesnotaccountforallofthem.Iargue,however,thatitisvital to focusongenderconstruction,since ithasbeenembeddedculturallyandsociallywithinideologies,entertainment,andlanguageinWesternsociety.TheoreticalFrameworkThis section discusses the theoretical framework of this study. It includes anexplanationofrhetoricalcriticism,feministrhetoricalcriticism,anditintroducestheideasofCherisKramarae.

RhetoricalCriticismRhetorical criticism helps locate and interpret both the surface and thesubmergedmeaningscreatedwithintherhetoricaltext(Donmoyer46).Toreflectthe variousmeanings that a text encapsulates, a criticmust be aware of thesymbolsusedinthemessageandhowsuchamessageispositionedinsystemsofthought.Thepurposeof rhetoricalcriticism is tohelpcritics“understandtheirexperiencemorerichly,toseelevelsofmeaningandsignificancethattheywouldnothaveseenbefore,andto instill inpeoplehabitsor techniquesof ‘reading’discourse”(Brummett56).Acloserlookatthedecisionsmadebytherhetorcan

74R.D.Moscozo

allowthecritictobegintounderstandwhatisthereandwhatisnot.InBurke’ssimplisticphrasing,“Awayofseeingisalsoawayofnotseeing—afocusonobjectAinvolvesaneglectofobjectB”(PermanenceandChange49).FollowingBurke,Iaminterestedinwhoisrepresentedandwhoisnot,whoisempoweredandwhoisnot,andtorevealwhatiscoveredbeneaththesurface.Thisrhetoricalcritiquepursues an understanding of what this text claims to communicate aboutWestern culture through a feminist lens. The following section explains howfeministrhetoricalcriticismplaysaninfluentialpartintheanalysisofofCrimsonPeak.

FeministRhetoricalCriticismFeminism includes many forms of thought, and is packed within variousinterpretationsof themovementandmeaningsattached,dependingonwhichspace in the feminist spectrum one inhabits. Kramarae and Treichler refer tofeminismas“aradicalnotionthatwomenarepeople.”Althoughthisstatementmay raise some eyebrows in disagreement, it lays the foundation of feministthought. Feminist advocates and critics focus on arguing against evidence ofpatriarchal systems thatmost civilizations, including theWesternworld, havesubscribed to for generations (Nudd, 2009, p. 257). The diverse richness offeminismuncoverstheexperienceofmen,women,andvariousidentitieswithinapatriarchalsocialsystemthathasbeenengulfedinawarbetweendivisionsofrace,power,andsocialstatus.

For the focus of this essay, I argue that gendered language reflects the“patriarchal rubric” towhich femalesand/or feministsareexpected toadhere(Nudd, 2009, p. 259). As previously noted, gender as a social construction isproblematicandinfluencesourlanguagechoicestoreflectstereotypesandmaledomination. This construction within society is one focus that feministrhetoricianshaveidentifiedamongsttheplethoraofissuesofmalecenterednessandmale identification that dominates eachof the sexes. “[Maledomination]meansthatmencanshapecultureinwaysthatreflectandservemen’scollectiveinterests—topromotethe ideathatmenaresuperior towomen”(Johnson6).Male centeredness and male identification both influences and enforces“systematicdisparitybetweengenderstobemaintained”(Nudd,2009,p.258).Hence,itisvitalforscholarstouncoverhowlanguageisusedtodefinegenderbyfollowingtheworkoffeministrhetoricaltheoristandcriticCherisKramarae.

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr75

CherisKramaraeIn 1974, Kramarae published an article titled “Women’s Speech: Separate butUnequal?”intheQuarterlyJournalofSpeech.Heressayandsubsequentoeuvrestarted a conversation about gender and language that has changed feministscholarship forever.According to Foss, Foss, andGriffin, hers “wasoneof theearliest efforts to incorporate, value, and legitimize the study of women’scommunication in thediscipline…Also,Kramarae’sdiverseareasof interest intechnology,education,andwomen’sstudies,recognizeherasanauthor,scholar,and theorist of feminism” (37). Her interest with intersections of gender,language,andpower influencedherco-authorshipofTheVoicesandWordsofWomenandMen(1980).Inthebook,Kramaraeexplainshowlanguageandthewayweverballyinteractdiffersforeachsex—throughtheperspectivesofmenandwomen—andengagesarangeofissuesincludingfemale-maleinteractions,women’suseofnarrativechaining,andtherelationshipbetweenlanguageandsocialchange.Inherresearch,sheobservestheuseoflanguagebywomenandmen from the theoretical frameworks of the muted group, reconstruction ofpsychoanalysis,speech-style,andstrategyframeworks(Foss37).

As an experienced scholar of language and its uses concerning gender,Kramarae’s focusonthe linguisticnatureoftheworld isamainfeatureofhercontributions to rhetorical theory. Kramarae contends that the world isconstructedthroughlanguageviatheavailablelinguisticandsyntacticmaterial,inturn“imposingastructureonpeople’sthinkingandontheirinteraction”(“AFeminist Critique” 8). Moreover, “The labels and descriptions we use helpdeterminewhatweexperience”(Foss,39).Kramarae’sideascallattentiontotheconstraintswithwhichanindividualmustcontendinordertofitwithinlinguisticstructures and, indeed, think and createmeaningsof theworld. The linguisticnature of the world tells us that “no “human experience [is] ‘free’ fromaccompanying language” (Foss, Foss, and Griffin 39) and our communicationthrough various languages, symbols, and text (e.g., text messaging or use ofEmojis) relates tooursocietalposition.Hence, it is theprojectofKramaraetostudy language for thegreatamountof information itholdsregardingsociety:“[I]fwecandiscovertheprinciplesoflanguageusage…wewillatthesametimediscover principles of social relations” (Women 119). This specific interest inlanguage is a prime feature of the subsequent rhetorical criticism of theproductionsofgenderwithinthisfilmictext.

A foremost concern of Kramarae’s work is social relations as it relates togender. SheseekstounderstandhowwomenaretreatedinlanguageandthekindsofEnglishwordsthatoperateintheWesternworld(Foss,Foss,andGriffin

76R.D.Moscozo

39).Forexample,inWesternculturetherecenttrendofyoungteenagers’useoftheword“bitch”toreferencetheirclosefriendsisonewaythatlanguageisusedbetweenyoung femalesnow.This termcanalsobeused in its traditionalandnegativewaytodemeanafemalebycallinghertheequivalentofadog.Today,both sexes use this word casually to refer to one another, but this usage oflanguagehasnegativeconnotationsattachedthatmanyyouthsmayormaynotbeawareofduetotheirimmaturity,lackofawarenessand/orknowledge,and/orlackofexperience.Aninterestingaspectofthiskindoflanguageuseof“bitch”betweenmenisthatitisonlyemployedwiththeintentiontoinsultoneanothersuchas,“you’reactinglikealittlebitch.”Therelationshipwiththeword“bitch”betweenmalesrelatestotheWesternsexisthierarchythatexiststoservemalesasdominantsocietalmembers,whereas,females’useofthistermdenotesasignoffriendshipandconnection.

AsthisrhetoricalstudyofgenderconstructioninCrimsonPeakisfixedwithinamediatedtext,andbecauseKramarae’sbackgroundinresearchoftechnologyandwomenhasbeen vast, she is an ideal resource for this project. In a 1997article entitled “Technology Policy, Gender and Cyberspace,” she states,“technologynotonlyunites,butalsodivides:therichandpoor,individualsandcountries,upperclassesandworkingclasses,womenandmen” (1).Withoutadoubt,Western society is highly influencedbydominant ideologiesofwomenservingmenasaschemabywhichtounderstandtheworld.Societalmemberswitness such ideologies at work within technology especially, as it has beenadaptedintothedailyroutinesandcovetedasaconnectiontotheworldaroundthem. Therefore, Kramarae suggests that theWesternworld creates languagepracticesthatreflectthesesocialrelations,andthattheyarerootedin“hierarchalrelationshipsbetweenmenandwomen” (Foss, Foss, andGriffin39). This idearelates to Kramarae’smainstream world, where the basis of hostility towardwomenisprevalent.

MainstreamWorld,aconceptreflectedinKramarae’sresearchoflanguagestructureandusage,explainsahostiletreatmentofwomenbasedonthesocialconstructions of gender through various communication practices (Foss, Foss,andGriffin39).Associalconstructs,muchlikerace,“thecategories‘women’and‘men’ are ideas that must be learned and reinforced” through language(Kramarae,“GenderandDominance”470).Suchconstructsworktodivideratherthanunitemenandwomen,because“wearetrainedtoseeonlytwosexes.Andthenwedoalotofworktocontinuetoseeonlythesetwosexes,whichwecallmale and female, boys and girls, men, and women” (Kramarae, “Gender andDominance”470).

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr77

AlsointheMainstreamWorld,languagesystemsnotonlycategorizemenandwomenbutalsocompartmentalizethembasedontheirsupposedgender.Thiscreatesunbalancedpowerrelationsbetweenthesexestoguaranteedominancetooccurofmenoverwomen. If languageequates togenderedcategoriesandcreates a disparity of power between the opposing sexes, then it can also“perpetuate the ideologies of those in power” by privileging perceptions,experiences,andmodesofexpression”(Kramarae,Schulz,andO’Barr16)tofitanideal imageof “womenservingmen” (Foss,Foss,andGriffin39).Asdiscussedpreviously,ideologiesconcerninggendercategorieshaveworkedsofluidlysincetheir inceptionthatsocialmembersareunawareof theirexistenceandpowerover their lives and language. Equalizing the sexes and opening lines ofcommunicationcanfighttheseideologieshead-on.Butanequalsocial,political,andeconomicpositionbetweenmenandwomenhasbeenacontroversialbattlethatcontinuestorageonwithinfeministscholarship.

Kramarae’sFeminismKramarae clarifies that her definition of the feminism works to disrupt thesystemsoflanguagethatcriticizefemaleactivistsforcreatingdiscussionsaboutthedailyhostilityandunfairtreatmenttowhichtheyaresubjected.Shearguesagainstthe“tendencytodiscredit feministswhocritiquemalepower[anduselabels]suchas‘embittered‘or‘unattractive’”(KramaraeandSpender10)toavoidtheissueofhowmalepowerhasbeenusedtocorruptandabusethepositionofwomen. As Kramarae explains, by “locating the problem in the women whoprotest,ratherthanintheirownprivilege,mencandenytheirownagencyandfurtherfrustrateandexacerbatethepositionofwomen”(“Punctuating”137).

Kramarae’s definition of feminismworks against this very idea of womenbeingunabletocommunicateonthesamelevelasmenbecauseofagendereddifferential that is socially constructed by men in power. She uses a criticalanalytical approach to challenge the linguistic system and the institutions itproduces (e.g., education, politics, religion). “With its focus on disruptingmainstream linguistic structures, feminism is characterized by ‘rethinking’ and‘restructuring’” inaprocessKramaraeterms“equilibriumbusting’”(Foss,Foss,andGriffin52).FollowingKramarae,forthisstudyfeminismshouldnotbeviewedin a static state, but as an ongoing process that disrupts the linguistic andempoweredstructuresthatcreateahostileenvironmentforwomen.

78R.D.Moscozo

GenderinPostmodernHorrorDonomyerassertsthatfilmmakershave[mis]representedwomenonthescreensince the inception of technology. At times, female characters and theirsituations,relationships,behaviors,reactions,clothes,etc.aredepictedinwaysthat reflect real women. At other times, the depictions are demeaning,stereotypical, or worse, obscene (1). As Neve Campbell’s character, SidneyPrescott,oncebeautifullyremarkedofhorror’susageoffemalecharactersinWesCraven’sScream(1996):

Phonevoice:Doyoulikescarymovies?SidneyPrescott:What’sthepoint?They’reallthesame.Somestupidkillerstalkingsomebig-breastedgirlwhocan’tactwhoisalwaysrunningupthestairswhensheshouldberunningoutthefrontdoor.It’sinsulting.(Craven)

Itistruethatcontemporaryhorrorisnotimmunefromitsilldisplaysofgenderanddoesflirtwithclassicalnotionsofmisogynywithpatriarchalcharacterswithinthestory,suchasinhorrorfilmslikeNightmareonElmStreet,TexasChainsawMassacre:TheNextGeneration,andtheScreamTrilogy.Althougheachfilmhascentralfemalecharactersthatsurvivedthestory,theirbodieswereobjectifiedinoverly sexualized manners and their female friends were mutilated beyondrecognition. “Inmodernist terms, it has been considered a degraded form ofpleasureandinducingmassculture”(Pinedo,1996).Thiskindoftreatmenthasoftenbeenmetwithfeministcriticism.

Manyfeministscholarsinterestedinfilmtheoryprescribeapsychoanalyticframework to analyze the psychological effects such films have. Feminist filmtheoristLauraMulvey’sinfluentialessay“VisualPleasureandNarrativeCinema”inspired feminists attracted to the psychodynamic approach in film. MulveyarguedthatnarrativeformscharacteristicofmainstreamHollywoodcinemausewomendifferentlyandservemen.Theobjectof“thegaze,”associatedbetweenthefemaleandthescreenandthepossessorofthegazeownedbytheviewerandtheman,producedpsychologicaltensions.Thistensionwasonlyresolvedbythemaleviewer’sidentificationwiththemaleprotagonistofthefilm.However,film studies scholar LindaWilliams scrutinizedMulvey’s theory to expose herstraightjacket association between males and the pleasures of looking, orspectatorship (744). Williams highlights that often in horror, contrary tomainstreamcinema,womendopossess the gaze. This is accomplishedby thefemalecharacter’sabilitytofirstwitness,inquireabout,andknowthemonster.Consequences for possessing this position of power ultimately results inpunishingthefemaleinhorrorfilmsthroughviolenceforappropriatingthegaze

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr79

and disrupting the masculine narrative order (744). Yet, if the gaze can bepossessedbybothsexesandwomeninthefilmarenotvictimsofviolenceandpunishment, as in Crimson Peak, then the gaze loses its power to enforcedominanceandpatriarchyonitsviewer.Instead,amanorawomancanattractthe viewer in their fictional form topersuade theaudience against traditionalpatriarchyandembraceanewherooranewenemy.

CynthiaA.Freeland,authorofFeministFrameworksforHorrorFilms(1996),critiques current feminist studies of horror films that are psychodynamic.Typically, this sort of feminist theory relies upon descriptions of women as“castrated or representations of threats evoking male castration anxiety”(Freeland). This rhetorical criticism rejects the ideaof thepsychodynamicasafeminist lensand insteadaims tounderstand the culturewithin the text.AsacriticstudyingCrimsonPeak,IwanttounderstandhowWesternculturalvaluesandbeliefsarereflectedintheconversationsbetweentheactorsinthisfilm.Inthefollowingsection,Iwillanalyzeeachcharacter’slanguageusetouncoverhowpostmodern film is beginning to have an influence on social constructions ofgender.CritiqueofLinguisticPracticesInwhat follows, I explicatehow I employa rhetorical approach toKramarae’scritiqueof linguistic practices toobserve thepatriarchalworldwithinCrimsonPeak.Comparabletothesocialconstructionofgender,languageisalsosociallyconstructed in a manner that renders us “open to alterations that fit” thedesignatedroleofwomen(Foss,Foss,andGriffin54).Throughlinguisticchoices,rhetors“caneithertacitlyacceptandtherebyhelpperpetuatethestatusquo,orchallenge,andtherebyhelpchangeit”(West,Lazar,andKramarae121)fromanoppressivesystemtoanopenconversation.Asthisrhetoricalapproachfocuseson theanalysisof linguistic structures todiscover if a rhetorical text serves todominatewomen,itbestsuitsthepremiseofthepresentessay.Hence,itisvitalforthisrhetoricalanalysistocritique linguisticpractices inordertocreateanduse language that“undermines,unmasks,andoverturns rulingdefinitionsandparadigms”(Foss,Foss,andGriffin54).

AccordingtoFoss,Foss,andGriffin,inordertounderstandthemainstreamworldthiscritiquefirstneedstoaddressthequestionofwhatourworld is.Byinterpretingthequotationsusedasexamplesfromeachcharacter,Iwilldescribethe context of the scene and how the character fights against patriarchallanguage.Secondly,asuccessfulcritiqueoflinguisticpracticesinvolvesafocusonthe“productssuchasconstructs,definitions,andhistoriesfromtheexperiences,

80R.D.Moscozo

perceptions, and insights of women and using the information gathered toidentify the inadequacies anddistortions in themainstreamversions” (55).Byfocusingonthegenderconstructionofeachcharacter’suseoflanguagechoice,Iwillcritiqueeachquotationfromthefilminthefollowingsection.Afterward,adiscussionoftheanalysiswilltietheexamplestogethertotheapproachusedbyKramarae.

Site1:EdithCushingEdith’s language choice during the beginning scenes will begin this rhetoricalcriticism,assherepresents theprotagonistof this story. In this scene,Edith isattemptingtopublishhermanuscript.ShetakesherworktoMr.Ogilvie tobeconsideredforpublication,yet,heonlycomplimentsherfemininehandwritingwith“niceandconfidentloops,”andofferssomegenderedadvice:

Edith:“Hetoldmeitneededalovestory.Canyoubelievethat?[…]HesaidthatjustbecauseI’mawoman.”

WhattheWorldIs.ThefictionalcharacterofEdithstrugglestogainrecognitionas a writer. Those around her mock her as “Jane Austen” for her ambitiouspassion forwriting.While the females aroundher are concernedwith gainingattentionfromtheoppositesex,Edithhasnotroubleattractingsuitorswithherintelligence,wit,andstrength.Thisdistortedperceptionofpatriarchalviewsofwomenbelonginginamarriagewithlowambitionsisstillunfortunatelypracticedtoday.

Critique.TheconstructionsandgendereddescriptionswithinEdith’slanguageforthis scenearevery commonofwomen in theearlynineteenthcenturyand intoday’sexperiencewithsexismwhenapplyingforajob.Edithisexperiencingacommonstigmathat isattached to femaleswhenentering theworkplace: thefeelingofnotbelonginginamalecenteredandidentifiedarenaissupportedbypatriarchalviewsofawoman’splace.

Site2:LucilleSharpeContrastingEdith,theantagonistofCrimsonPeakisLucilleSharpe(Chastain).Shecanbecharacterizedbyherdangerous,intelligent,andcolddemeanor.Notonlyis she a talentedmusician, but she is alsopowerful, independent, and strong.Unlikeherbrother,sheisunafraidtogetherhandsdirty.UponmeetingEdith,sheissetouttoobtainherfather’sinheritanceinorderto“buy”EdithwiththeringofLucille’smother(whoshekilledincoldblood).LucilleSharpeisconsidered

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr81

the“mastermind”ofadeviousplantoisolateEdithfromherfriendsandfamilyin order for her brother, Thomas Sharpe (Hiddleston), to marry her for herfather’s fortune.Once shearrivesat thehomeof theSharpes (AllerdaleHall),Edith becomes very sick and realizes that Lucille is slowly killing her withpoisonoustea.AlthoughLucilleissetouttokillEdith,itisnotbecausesheenjoysit, but because she is in love. Theman she loves happens to be her brother,Thomas,andsheiswillingtodoanythingfortheirlove.

InanargumentwithThomas,LucilleisawarethatEdithknowsthattheteaismakinghersickandstopsdrinkingit.ThomassympathizesforEdithanddefendsherweakenedstate.

Lucille:“[O]fcourseshe'sdying.Sheknowseverything.Shestoppeddrinkingthetea.Doesn'tmatter.Iputthepoisonintheporridge."

WhattheWorldIs.Lucilleisassertive.Sheknowswhatshewants,andalthoughthatmaybeverydifferentfromthenorm,shedoesnotawaitamaletostepinandhandlethedirtyworkforher.Sheissurprisinglycoolandcomposedwhenshekills,andwithouthesitationorremorseforthewomenshemurders.Sheisthebestkindofkiller.Sheanswerstonoonebutherself.Herlanguageimpliesherdominance in the relationshipwithherbrother.He fights toprotectEdithfrom Lucille, but Lucille sees Edith as a child with a lot of money and anopportunitytosatisfyhergreed.Critique.Although,Lucilleisindependent,shedoescovetsomepatriarchalvaluesofthepast,meaningthatherloveforherbrotherhascausedhertolosehermind,andthejealousyshefeelstowardEdithextenuatesherloathingforher.Lucilleisnotweak or being dominated because she loves; rather, it is her actions thatspeaklouder,becausesheiswillingtomurderanyonetostaywithherbelovedbrother.

Site3:Edith&LucilleDuringthefinalscenesofthefilm,LucilleandEdithsquareoff.EdithishurtandLucilleisinahystericalstateduetomurderingherbrotherbecauseofhisloveforEdith. She could not have that, so she stabs him in the eye. This is the lastconversationthetwohavebeforeoneofthemisdeadinthesnow.

Lucille:“Iwon’tstoptillyoukillmeorIkillyou.”Edith:“Iheardyouthefirsttime.”[ShestabsLucillewithabutcherknife.]

82R.D.Moscozo

WhattheWorldIs.Bothfemalecentralcharactersinthisstoryarefinallyatodds,physicallyandemotionally.Losshasfollowedthemeverywheretheyhavebeen,andnowtheyarepracticallystrippeddowntotheirbarebones.Inthisexcerpt,itishardtofindanydistortionsotherthantheobvious,asamediatedtext.Thissceneisverypowerfulandverydifferentfrommostfinalscenesinhorrorfilms.Itisnotrelyingoncomputer-generatedimagery(CGI)ormakeuptocreatetheterror.Itisconveyedthroughthesetwofemalesthatwanttofighttostayaliveandtodothat,theymustgothrougheachother.Critique. As mentioned above, it is very rare to end a film with two femalecharacters fighting to the death, and the constructions produced by theirlanguagechoicesconveystrengthandsurvival.Withnoonetoprotecteitherofthem,theyrelyonintuitionandtheirneedtofight.Intheend,EdithsurvivesandendsLucille’slife.FindingsInthisfinalsectionofthisessay,IprovideandassessthefindingsofthisrhetoricalcriticismofCrimsonPeak.Oneofmymajorcomplaintsregardingthe languageused in the filmwas the subtle yet obvious jealousybetween the two femalecharacters.Granted,eachcharacterwashighlyindependentandtenacious.Yettheyhadtokilleachotheroveramale interest in theend.Forexample,afterThomasdeclaredhisloveforEdith,LucillekilledhimandplannedtomurderEdithaswellbecauseofherjealousrage.Perhapsshewasmentallyunstable,too.ButherweaknesswasThomas,andintheend,itkilledher.

Edith, incontrast,demonstratedmore independenceoverall.Forexample,aftershefoundoutabouttheloveaffairoftheSharpes,shedidnotallowtheirbetrayaltobreakherdown.Instead,EdithrosetotheoccasionandchallengedLucille. Therefore, my main critique of Lucille’s character is her stereotypical“girlfriend”behaviorthatledhertobeconsumedbyaman.Yet,inmyopinion,duringthelastsceneofthefilm,thenon-stereotypicalbehaviorofEdithastheheroine redeemed Lucille’s faults. For example, after the battle and the finalmomentsofthefilm,Edithsavedherfriend,Alan,whoattemptedtorescueherbutwasstabbedbyThomas.

EdithCushing’scharacterdoesfightagainstgenderedlanguage,andsheisanexcellent representation of non-patriarchal values that were attempted to beimposeduponher.AlthoughhercharacterisCaucasianandprivileged,shedoesnotallowherwealthtostopherfrombeingindependent.ThecharacterofEdith

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr83

fightsagainsttraditionalfemalerolesofpatriarchythroughoutthisfilm,andintheend,shewasthesurvivorwhostoppedtheSharpes’evilfromcontinuing.

LucilleSharpe’scharacterhassomeundertonesoftraditionalpatriarchy,asshewarrantshermurdersbyvirtueofherloveforherbrother.Inthefilm,shecomesfromalovelessfamily,anditwouldseemreasonabletofindattachmentinasibling,butshehasaveryderangedunderstandingoflove.Also,thejealousythatLucilleexperiencestowardEdithmakesherseemverystereotypical,asshecallsalloftheattentionforherselfbyThomas.Herneedystatesuggeststhatsheisstillfallinginlinewithstereotypicalhorrorcharacterswhoareinlove,butintheend,allowthatlovetokillthem.

My findingsdemonstrate that gendered languagewithin ahorror film canrepresent female characters as strong, independent, characters—even beingportrayedasheroesandvillains.Thesignificanceofthesefindingssuggeststhathorror filmsarebeginning to shift away from traditional stereotypical rolesofwomen, often as a damsel in distress. A tension that was found within thecharacterswas that Lucille’s characterdidnotmeasureup to thechallengeofstereotypes.Unfortunately,hercharacterwasmorealignedwithpatriarchalandhegemonic ideologies than that of Edith’s, which I found to be surprisinglydepressing.ConclusionInthisessay,IhavearguedthatalthoughCrimsonPeakcontainssometraditionalformsofpatriarchalideology,itneverthelesstranscendstheimprisoningboundsofsociallyconstructedidealsofgenderbychallengingthesocietalexpectationofthebehaviorofwomeninsituationsofdisempowerment.IemployedKramarae’scritiqueoflinguisticpracticestoquotationsfromCrimsonPeaktodemonstratehowthefilmchallengestraditionalnarrativesofwomeninhorrorfilmsandcanrepresentanewbeginningoffeministfilmtexts.

Not only are the two main characters of this film female, but also theircharacters areportrayed realistically in theway theyencounterobstacles andsharecomplexexperiencesthatfemalescanidentifywith.Theprimarylimitationofthisresearchconcernsmyrelianceononlyonetextforanalysis.Iencouragefuture scholarshipwithin communication studies andbeyond toaskquestionsabouthowgenderand languageareused inrecentfilmsoutsideofthehorrorgenre.Iaminterestedinfurtheringthisresearchbyinvolvinganaudienceanalysisportiontoopenupadialogueofhowrecentmoviesimpactfilmgoersbyaskingifthe female actresses are breaking gender boundaries or conforming to them.Examininglanguageuseinfilmcanberepresentativeofthecultureinwhichwe,

84R.D.Moscozo

as social actors, thrive. It is important to be aware of how language canacknowledgesomegroupsofpeopleandcompletelyignoreothers.

InthisrhetoricalcriticismofCrimsonPeak,amessageofgenderequalityandjustice can be interpreted as a step in the right direction for Hollywoodentertainment. Yet gender oppression and female underrepresentation onscreenisstillprevalent.Inherrecentstudyofgenderinequalityinpopularfilm,Communication scholar Stacy L. Smith found that females are “grosslyunderrepresentedin2012films”(1).Thisstudyresultedinthefollowingfindings:

Outof4,475speakingcharactersonscreen,only24.8percentare female.Thistranslatesintoaratioof2.51malestoevery1femaleonscreen.2012revealsthelowestpercentageofon-screenfemales(28.4percent)acrossthe5-yearsample.Offscreen,only16.7percentofthe1,228directors,writers,andproducersarefemaleactressthe100top-grossingfilmsof2012.(1)

These statistics are alarming and should serve as motivation for futurescholarship to continue research regardinggender representation through theuseoflanguageinfilmtexts.ThereisclearlymoreworktobedonebyscholarsofCommunication Studies and rhetoricians. Yet language use is not confined toinstitutions of education. On the contrary, language extends beyond theclassroom,andthechangeweseekexistsinoureverydayinteractionswithoneanother. The way we talk to each other and having an awareness of otheridentitiessuchasgenderisthefirststepinchangingdominantdiscourse.Onthemostbasic level, genderequalitybeginswithus,and it isour responsibilityasprogressive people to not only seek gender justice but also engender it withactionsandembodyitwithinourselves.

Toclose,IwillendwithmyfavoritelinefromCrimsonPeak,whichrepresentsan outlook of what we as advocates of feminism hope to accomplish for thefutureoffilms.AsEdithleavesAlantofightLucille,shesaystohim:

“I’mgoingtogetusoutofhere.Iwillgethelp.Youhavetotrustme.I’llcomebackforyou.Ipromise,Iwill.Gohide.”

WorksCited

Brown,William R. “Ideology as Communication Process.”Quarterly Journal ofSpeech64(1993):123-40.Print.

LLaanngguuaaggeeiinnPPoossttmmooddeerrnnHHoorrrroorr85

Brummett,Barry. “PremillennialApocalyptic: Commentary.”CriticalQuestions.Eds.William Nothstine, Carole Blair, and Gary Copeland. NY: St.Martin's,1994.281-285.Print.

Burke,Kenneth.PermanenceandChange:AnAnatomyofPurpose.Indianapolis:TheBobbs-Merril,1954.Print.

----.The Philosophy of Literary Form: Studies in Symbolic Action. Berkely:U ofCaliforniaP,1973.Print.

Di Stefano, Christine. “Dilemmas of Difference: Feminism, Modernity, andPostmodernism.”Women,Politics&Policy8(2008):1-24.Print.

Donmoyer,Deidra.“FindingSpace:ACriticismoftheRhetoricalConstructionoftheFemaleActionHeroinFilm.”Ph.D.Thesis.AnnArbor:UofMichigan.Web.10March2016.

Gitlin, Todd. “Postmodernism: Roots and Politics.” Cultural Politics inContemporaryAmerica.Eds.IanAngusandSutJhally.NewYork:Routledge,1989.347-60.Print.

Fiumara,JamesJ.“GrotesqueAttractions:GenreHistory,PopularEntertainment,and theOriginsof theHorror Film.”Ph.D.Dissertation,UofPennsylvania,2012.Web.4March2016.

Foss.KarenA.,SonjaK.Foss,andCindyL.Griffin.FeministRhetoricalTheories.LongGrove,IL:Waveland,1999.Print.

Freeland, Cynthia. “Feminist Frameworks for Horror Films.” PostTheory: ReconstructingFilmStudies.Eds.NoëlCarrollandDavidBordwell.Madison,WI:UofWisconsinP,1996.195-218.Print.

Hall,Stuart.“TheproblemofIdeology:MarxismwithoutGuarantees.”StuartHall:CriticalDialoguesinCulturalStudies.Eds.DavidMorleyandKuan-HsingChen.London:Routledge.24-45.Print.

Hennessey, Rosemary. “Women's Lives/Feminist Knowledge: FeministStandpointasIdeologyCritique.”Hypatia8(1993):14-34.Print.

Huyssen, Andreas. After the Great Divide: Modernism, Mass Culture,Postmodernism.Bloomington:IndianaUP,1986.Print.

Johnson,AllenG.TheGenderKnot.Philadelphia:TempleUP,1997.Print.Kramarae, Cheris. “A Feminist Critique of Sociolinguistics.” Journal of the

AtlanticProvincesLinguisticAssociation8(1986):1-22.Print.----.“GenderandDominance”CommunicationYearbook15.Ed.StanleyA.Deetz.

NewburyPark,CA:Sage,1992.470-75.Print.----.“PunctuatingtheDictionary.”InternationalJournalofSocietyandLanguage

94(1992):137-8.Print.

86R.D.Moscozo

----."TechnologyPolicy,Gender,andCyberspace."DukeJournalofGenderLaw&Policy,4(1997):149-97.Print.

----.WomenandMenSpeaking:FrameworksforAnalysis.Rowley,MA:NewburyHouse,1981.Print.

Kramarae,Cheris,MurielSchulz,andWilliamM.O’Barr.“Introduction:TowardanUnderstandingofLanguageandPower.”LanguageandPower.Eds.CherisKramarae,Muriel Schulz, andWilliamM. O’ Barr. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage,1984.9-22.Print.

Kramarae, Cheris, and Dale Spender. “Exploding Knowledge.” The KnowledgeExplosion: Generations of Feminist Scholarship. Eds. Cheris Kramarae andDaleSpender.London:TeachersCollegePress,1992.1-24.Print.

Nudd,Donna,andKristinaWhalen.“FeministAnalysis.”RhetoricalCriticism.Ed.JimKuypers.Lanham,MD:LexingtonBooks,2009.257-84.Print.

Penfield,Joyce.WomenandLanguageinTransition.Albany:SUNYPress,1987.Pinedo,Isabel.“RecreationalTerror:PostmodernElementoftheContemporary

HorrorFilm.”JournalofFilmandVideo48(1996):17-31.Print.Prince,Stephen.TheHorrorFilm.NewBrunswick,NJ:RutgersUP,2004.Print.Scream.Dir.WesCraven.Perf.NeveCampell.DimensionFilms,1996.Film.Smith,StacyL,MarcChoueiti,ElizabethScofield,andKatherinePieper.“Gender

Inequalityin500PopularFilms:ExaminingOn-ScreenPortrayalsandBehind-the-ScenesPatternsinMotionPicturesReleasedbetween2007-2012.”UofSouthernCalifornia.2012.Web.9April2016.

“TopUSGrossingHorrorTitles.”n.d.n.p.Web.2March2016.“UnderstandingGender.”GenderSpectrum.n.p.2014.Web.2March2016.West, Candace, Michelle Lazar, and Cheris Kramarae. “Gender in Discourse.”

Discourse: AMultidisciplinary Introduction. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. London,Sage,1997.119-42.Print.

Williams, Linda. “Film Bodies: Gender, Genre, and Excess.” Film Quarterly 44(1991):2-13.Print.