ABSTRACT
Within the discipline of psychology there is a well-known debate going on as to how psychological modes of understanding are sexist. Countless criticisms have pointed to how psychological concepts and theories act to establish general norms of behaviour that implicitly follow masculinity (Weisstein 1971, Haavind 1978, Tavris 1992, Marecek 1995). Other criticisms directed attention to how the experiences of women could so easily be misrepresented by implicit valorization of how well the activities of women fitted into the satisfaction of the needs of others with regard to priority and support (Chesler 1972, Haavind 1973; Chodorow & Contratto 1982). Among the contributions along these lines is the deconstruction of the position of women in heterosexual relationships (Millett 1970; Kitzinger et al. 1992). According to both types of criticism, the possible subjectivities of women would be transformed by psychological concepts into a degrading and oppressive representation of their intentions. Instead of revealing the psychological aspects of the social subordination of women, psychology as a mode of understanding the female self contributed to legitimizing the oppression of women through normalization and valorization of femininity (Haavind 1978, Ethelberg 1983).
