Gendering the Unsaid and the Unsayable

Rhetorical silences are not created equal. To determine the import of the unsaid, the power differential of gender (as conceptualized by gender theory) is methodologically indispensable. “Masculinity” and “femininity,” concepts related to presumptions of domination and subordination, affect the rhetorical function of the unsaid. Permitted-to-speak bodies are often already empowered; for them, the unsaid denotes and maintains their masculinist power. Subordinate bodies, from whom silence is expected, perform simply another iteration of a regulatory, disciplinary norm that considers them feminine or weak. Nevertheless, the gendering of dominant and subordinate roles does not erase the subversive possibilities of the unsaid. The masculine unsaid may be stripped of its power if an alternative hierarchy is introduced to challenge tacit assumptions of dominance. Meanwhile, the feminine unsaid may become a tool that defies hegemonic power structures by using the unsaid as a tactic for conveying forbidden ideas, stubbornly communicating the unsayable. Categories of the “masculine” unsaid, the subordinate unsaid, and the resistant unsaid offer valuable classifications for developing a comprehensive methodology of the unsaid. Yet these categories are not comprehensive within themselves or neatly discrete from one another. Rather, they are permeable, in constant engagement and renegotiation with one another.