Alberto Grandi

La presente ricerca dottorale indaga il legame tra linguaggio, maschilità, potere e organizzazione del lavoro, proponendo un modello formativo e comunicativo capace di promuovere pari opportunità e di decostruire il paradigma fallogo-capitalista. Quest’ultimo è inteso come l’intreccio tra logocentrismo, fallocentrismo e capitalismo, che attraverso il linguaggio modella soggettività, relazioni e strutture di potere nelle organizzazioni contemporanee. L’obiettivo della ricerca è, dunque, duplice: da un lato, analizzare i dispositivi linguistici e simbolici che riproducono gerarchie di genere e modelli identitari rigidi, in particolare focalizzandosi sulla “maschilità”; dall’altro, elaborare strategie comunicative e formative orientate alla costruzione di relazioni organizzative più eque e plurali. A tale scopo, la tesi mette in dialogo la différance derridiana e la teoria butleriana della performatività, assumendo il linguaggio come pratica costitutiva della realtà sociale, politica e imprenditoriale. Nello specifico, il lavoro combina analisi teorica e sperimentazione empirica: nei primi capitoli viene delineata una genealogia del paradigma fallogo-capitalista; nel quarto, tali analisi vengono tradotte in una prassi formativa di matrice queer, integrando pratiche specifiche e modalità consulenziali filosofiche. Questa metodologia è stata inoltre applicata nel tirocinio presso Leader Confcooperative Puglia, dove i percorsi di formazione queer hanno prodotto un calo della percezione di discriminazione (dal 40,8% al 12,9%) e un incremento della consapevolezza linguistica e relazionale. La ricerca tenta quindi di dimostrare che la filosofia del linguaggio e di genere, intrecciata alla prassi organizzativa, può agire come dispositivo etico e trasformativo. In questa prospettiva, infatti, il linguaggio e il metodo queer elaborato e proposto in questo lavoro non si limita a offrire un lessico alternativo, ma diviene gesto decostruttivo e performativo, capace di scardinare le logiche del paradigma fallogo-capitalista e di generare strategie comunicative orientate alla realizzazione delle pari opportunità nei contesti aziendali.

Le riflessioni femministe hanno ripensato concetti chiave, come l’identità di genere e i rapporti di potere, estendendosi così alla mascolinità e alle sue prassi egemoniche. Nella civiltà occidentale, infatti, il maschile funge da canone, incarnando una “forza- dominio” che permea il pensiero storico-sociale e si presenta come logos universale capace di definire il “tutto” a partire da sé. Questo dispositivo epistemico, ancorato alla dicotomia maschile/ femminile e alla pretesa neutralità del soggetto conoscente, ha prodotto identità gerarchizzate che nella ripetizione performativa hanno trovato una forza naturalizzante e aprioristica, prescrivendo vie stabilite in base all’organo genitale. Vie, tuttavia, che possono essere sfidate e ri-tracciate, sviluppando nuovi processi identitari. Questo articolo mira, dunque, a decostruire il modello della mascolinità egemone, con il fine di ripensare le identità in modo fluido e libero dai vincoli socioculturali che la prassi storico-performativa inchioda a ogni corpo.

The visage is not merely an anatomical portion of the body, but a semiotic and performative dispositive, situated in constant tensions between recognition and misrecognition, deconstructing the phallogocentric paradigm that regulates facial and bodily expressivity through hierarchical dynamics. Following Butler and Derrida, it becomes evident that the visage is not a neutral element but a construct that determines who can be recognised as a subject and who, conversely, is relegated to invisibility and subordination. Indeed, the normative regulation of the visage is inscribed within a network of binary oppositions, in which masculinity is associated with force and authority, while femininity is constructed in terms of receptiveness and subalternity. However, the visage is not merely a site of subjugation but also of resistance. Through feminist combative self-awareness – a corporeal and semiotic practice inspired by martial arts, which reconfigures force beyond the logic of domination – the visage becomes an act of reappropriation, capable of subverting the rigidity of imposed categories. Drawing on Derrida’s theory of différance, it is shown that force is not a monolithic attribute but a dynamic process interweaving body, mind, and emotion, thereby opening up new possibilities for expression. From this perspective, the combative visage is not merely a site of opposition to the dominant paradigm but an active practice of resignification, where bodily and facial expressivity becomes a subversive language. The rewriting of the visage, therefore, not only deconstructs phallogocentric hegemony but inaugurates a new field of expressive and political possibilities, transforming force into a dispositive of self-determination.

Throughout Western history, feminisms have acted as transformative and “peaceful” forces, challenging power structures and proposing alternative models based on equity, coexistence, and the sustainability of relationships. This contribution situates itself within this horizon, offering a reworking of the theories of Judith Butler and Alessandra Chiricosta – in dialogue with Derrida – aimed at a social and organisational objective: to promote equitable and innovative practices through the deconstruction of the hegemonic male gaze. The aim is to strengthen social and workplace participation and equality for all individuals, through performative strategies capable of dismantling the phallogocentric paradigm that has historically linked “force” with domination and male visibility. In this context, Butler’s concept of nonviolence as performative action and Chiricosta’s feminist combative self-awareness emerge as transformative bodily practices, capable of generating new meanings, subverting hierarchies, and fostering sustainable relationships. The body, from being an object of representation, becomes an active subject of resistance and narration, opening up spaces for new ways of seeing and coexisting. The objective is to contribute to the construction of contexts – social, political, and professional – in which force is no longer equated with overpowering, but rather with the capacity to transform conflicts into opportunities, promoting equal dignity and recognition

Over the past decades, video games have emerged as one of the most influential media products in popular culture, conveying a multitude of messages and symbols that reflect as well as shape social reality. This paper aims to explore how video games contribute to the construction and perpetuation of gender stereotypes within a cultural context dominated by the phallogocentric paradigm. Through the analysis of Jacques Derrida’s theories on the logocentric paradigm and différance, together with Judith Butler’s reflections on gendered performativity, it will be explored how language and video game representations act as performative acts co-producing reality. Acts, which not only consolidate social norms, producing hate speech and discrimination at times when images that are not “appropriate” are represented, but can also offer possibilities for rewriting and resisting such structures. The introduction of the concept of iterability, applied to the sphere of language in relation to both gender performativity and videogame dynamics, opens up a stimulating reflection on the subversive potential inherent in videogames themselves, which are not mere reflections of the dominant culture, but active tools in the definition and redefinition of gender “identities”. The analysis proposed here is therefore intended to analyse not only the stereotyped and phallogocentric gender representations within video games, focusing on instances of hate-spreading, but rather the occasions in which these media products pose as instruments of resistance, challenging traditional binarisms and offering new identity models.

With the introduction/start of Horizon Europe, the European Commission made gender equality plans a basic requirement for participation in its research framework programme. Not all institutions have adopted the GEP – some have done so only partially – however, the document represents an attempt to pursue gender equality in different areas. The GEP at the academic level may represent an attempt to apply the vulnerability paradigm to contexts. In accordance with the purpose of the GEP, the analysis of language becomes central, especially in its performative and reiterative key of discriminatory patterns. Reflecting on communication opens the possibility of counteracting stereotypes and creating equal environments through, for example, the creation of specific vademecums. Therefore, using the theoretical lenses of vulnerability and language, a reflection on the opportunities offered by the adoption of GEP is made.

Gender studies has produced various analyses around issues such as social “roles,”coexistence and power relations; seeing language as a central aspect, especially since the development of performativity theory produced by philosopher Judith Butler. In this paper, so, I would like to focus on the existing relationship between language and gender relations, particularly in the workplace; pointing out how some possibilities and structures are dense with unequal and sexist modalities. The analysis will consist of a first theoretical section, in which the specific relationship between the gendered “male”subject and language will be emphasized, and a second in which these considerations will be portrayed in the corporate context. The purpose is to show how specific aspects of masculinity have generated specific power relations, delineating, and defining stereotypes and categorizing views. Attributes that have then flowed into the different social dynamics of our society, establishing different job roles and possibilities. To give more profundity, I adopted a methodology that fuses the logical-linguistic theoretical perspective, to the analysis of empirical data collected through interviews, questionnaires, and training meetings at two partner companies.

Gender studies have generated numerous questions regarding the potential of language and the power relations it produces, especially after the philosopher Judith Butler's reinterpretation of Austinian performativity theory. She in fact reinterpreted this theory not only in linguistic terms, but also in relation to the normative power that nails biological fates to anatomical bodies, pinning them into roles and permissions defined by dominant praxis. With the theory of gender performativity, the connection between language, identity and power becomes even clearer and more incisive, seeing hate speech as playing a central role in both the maintenance of praxis and the disciplining of people in accordance with such praxis. Starting from a reflection on the universalization of man through the appropriation of language-logos, the aim of this paper will therefore be to highlight the intricate link between hate speech and hegemonic masculinity. It will then emphasize how the denigrating and punitive functionality of hate speech is central to the reiteration of the subordinating binarism on which patriarchal hegemony is founded. In this way, it will be possible to think of strategies, such as re-signification, that not only disarm the violent potential of hate speech, but also contribute to rewriting the underlying social praxis, producing anti-discriminatory and equalitarian models.

Gender studies has generated numerous questions around “neutral” forms, such as the concept of “Self”. The aim of this analysis is to highlight how “neutral” forms are central to the reiteration of the binary model and the dominance of “man2”. Historically, man is the archetype, placing his supremacy as part of the natural order of things. Inserted into this model, many thinkers have considered the male as the transcendental gender, so, elevating the masculine as universal, a-sexed and decorporealised. In this way, man has convinced himself that he’s not conditioned by his masculinity and can speak for all humanity, becoming the logosthrough which he declines the rest. Man, therefore, has made himself “neutral” – both in the conceptual sense and in the grammatical structure (particularly of binary languages such as Italian) – by taking control of language. Through it, he orders and constitutes the world, developing dichotomies and signifying anatomical bodies. In this research, it is intended to work on language and the relationship between “neutral” and power, emphasizing how that relationship is central to the reproduction of the patriarchal model. Through a critical philosophical reflection, which sees a logical-linguistic and historical-processual methodological structure, the discourse of the I-neutral will be crossed, pointing out how that “neutral” is in truth male. The concluding goal will be to, through “fluid” visions, build the basis for a language that is truly neutral and ready to embrace multiplicity, without relations of domination; a language really inclusive and not a reiterator of the patriarchal model.

Feminist considerations have induced a rethinking of many aspects of our contemporary world, such as the concept of gender and power relations. This has led to a re-examination of the entire previous tradition of thought, finding in phallogocentrism the paradigm of reference. This term indicates, starting with Derrida's considerations, the Western tendency to have centred not only the logos, but also the phallus, weaving an intricate relationship between masculinity and language. It's precisely this bond that makes man the archetype on which society is founded, placing his supremacy in the natural order, defining power relations and nailing pre-established categories. A being-nailed in the Lévinasian sense, thus an adherence between the agreement of voices and being, which produces 'category-beings' in which pre-delineated social identity is concealed in a condition of 'nature', such as the 'being-male'. It's precisely this naturalness, discursively produced, that has made man universal. Consequently, man has convinced himself that he can speak for all humanity, becoming the logos through which he declines the rest. Declinations that have produced rigid and hierarchical categories that precede and define each person, prescribing 'consonant' ways, rhetorically assumed as 'human nature'. The "nature" of being man or woman does not, in fact, concern monolithic essentialisms, but rather movements of intertwined meanings in a process that Derrida defines as différance. A process, therefore, in becoming, which has over time produced unequal power relations, justifying them as "natural", and which daily reiterates a hegemonic and sexist social model. The aim of this analysis, hence, will be to bring phallogocentric masculinity and consequent hegemonic structures into the field of philosophical reflection, with the purpose of redirecting praxis towards performative processes of characterisation the person, rather than a pre-delineated categorisation. Thus, to release being from socio-cultural categories, which historical-performative praxis nails to each body.

Feminist reflections have led to a rethinking of many aspects of our contemporary world, such as the concept of masculinity and its power relations. In Western civilisation, in fact, man is the archetype, thus making his supremacy part of the natural order of things. This very naturalness, discursively produced and performed, is what has made man invisible and universal, hence without the need to think-and think oneself-in terms of gender. As a result, man has convinced himself that he is not influenced by his own masculinity and can speak for all mankind, becoming the logos through which he declines the rest, prescribing 'consonant' ways of being a man or a woman. Historically, then, different power relations have developed, generating violent forms of communication that, on a daily basis, reiterate a hegemonic and sexist social model. This has led to the production of certain stereotypical attributes that have subsequently flowed into different social dynamics, establishing different roles and work possibilities that have welded structural problems: such as, for example, the 'glass ceiling'. The aim of this analysis, therefore, will be to reason about the concept of masculinity and the consequent hegemonic-linguistic structures, wondering how such reflections can be translated back into the corporate sphere. This is with the aim of producing anti-discriminatory and equal systems that improve workers' conditions, as well as their general outlook on gender issues. The methodology adopted will see the use of philosophical-pragmatic theoretical reflection, in particular around the theory of linguistic performativity, fused with empirical data collection in the corporate sphere as a result of questionnaires, contextual analyses and training courses carried out at an Italian corporation.