“When I came here. I learnt to speak English through trial and error. After my arrival I started to attend “English as a second language” classes, but I had to stop shortly after. I could not work and study at the same time. Instead I learnt by listening to other people and trying to reply when spoken to” (Kabeer 292).
In hindsight, what deterred women from gaining good language proficiency was their social and cultural background. Being taught to look at them lesser in ways puts them in situations where they could barely learn. This becomes a loop of mismanagement in gendering habits.
On a similar note, in writing about Lesbians and Lesbianism, Calhoun cites “Lesbianism is the only concept I know of which is beyond the categories of sex (woman and man), because the designated subject (lesbian) is not a woman, either economically, or politically, or ideologically. For what makes a woman is a specific social relation to a man, a relation that we have previously called servitude” (Calhoun 322).
In conclusion, the work of Delph-Janiurek presents how women might be conditioned to consider their voice as feminine and might tend to mimic the male voice in order to battle a stereotype. Here the conditioning of women makes them respond to a stereotype stimulus even when they do not have to. On a similar note, the work of Naila Kabeer shows that even when they have the chances to go on and get better work or improve their language speaking skills, women prefer to stay home and do homework. Even in the context of understanding lesbian or non-lesbian women powers, a relative comparison with men seems inevitable.