Feminist Philosophers

News feminist philosophers can use

RIP Louise Bourgeois, artist and sculptor May 31, 2010

Filed under: the arts,Uncategorized — jj @ 9:44 pm

Lousie Bourgeois died at the age of 98 on May 31, 2010.

From the NYTimes:

Louise Bourgeois, the French-born American artist who gained fame only

Louise Bourgeois - "The Accident"

late in a long career, when her psychologically charged abstract sculptures, drawings and prints had a galvanizing effect on younger artists, particularly women … Ms. Bourgeois’s sculptures in wood, steel, stone and cast rubber, often organic in form and sexually explicit, emotionally aggressive yet witty, covered many stylistic bases. But from first to last they shared a set of repeated themes, centered on the human body and its need for nurture and protection in a frightening world.

Among her most familiar sculptures was the much exhibited “Nature Study” (1984), a headless sphinx with powerful claws and multiple breasts. Perhaps the most provocative was “Fillette” (1968), a large detached latex phallus. Ms. Bourgeois can be seen carrying this object, nonchalantly tucked under one arm, in a portrait by the photographer Robert Mapplethorpe taken for the catalog of her 1982 retrospective at the Museum of Modern Art. (In the catalog, the Mapplethorpe picture is cropped to show only the artist’s smiling face.)

The Times has a short slide show of her work here.

From the Guardian:

It was not until the Museum of Modern Art gave Bourgeois a retrospective in 1982, when she was already 70, that she at last took her place as queen of New York, one of the most inventive and disturbing sculptors of the century, and later of course the first artist to to tackle a commission for a temporary work to command the vast spaces of the new Tate Modern’s turbine hall.

 

Combating stereotypes: A Quinean moment May 31, 2010

Filed under: academia,bias,science,teaching — jj @ 4:36 pm

Though the following is an anecdote, it is analyzed more seriously in a professional science-education journal.  It illustrates the Quinean point that there is more than one way to adjust one’s beliefs in light of a recalcitrant experience:

In many ways, it was typical of the kinds of things that NSF-funded researchers do to fulfil [sic] their broader-impacts requirement. [Diandra Leslie-Pelecky] took three female graduate students on weekly visits to local classrooms, where they spent 45-minutes leading nine- and ten-year-old children in practical activities designed to teach them about electricity and circuits. The visitors also talked about their lab work and careers. In addition, Leslie-Pelecky did something less typical of broader-impacts efforts: she brought along education researchers to study the effect of this interaction on the children’s perception of scientists.

Those assessments were startling, she says. After three months, most of the students said that they still weren’t sure who these young ‘teachers’ were – except that they couldn’t possibly be scientists. In their minds, scientists were unfriendly, grey-haired old men in white lab coats.

In addition to the Quinean moment, we can see that cultural stereotypes can trump personal experience.  This may be part of what is behind student incivility toward women profs.

the anecdote appears in a fuller discussion of NSF funding requirements in NatureNews.

h/t to female science professor.

 

Fathers set up to fail? May 30, 2010

Filed under: maternity,paternity — stoat @ 6:47 pm

Ok, maybe I’m irritated by having spent a sunny Bank holiday marking, but the views discussed in this article gets my back right up. Apparently, ‘male involvement in pregnancy can weaken the paternal bond’:

The disappointment and feeling of failure experienced by men expecting to have an intimate and proactive role as their baby gestates, only to find their function is largely one of passive support for their partner, can cause emotional shutdown, according to Dr Jonathan Ives, head of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics at the University of Birmingham.

[...]

Men should instead be told that it is not their duty to attend antenatal classes and be encouraged to wait outside the delivery room as their child is born, said Ives.

Or, how about trying to do more to make sure men – or women with pregnant partners (who don’t get a mention in the report (though admittedly, I’ve not read the research referred to)) – support their partners without unrealistic expectations?

Or perhaps there’s less reason to worry about the feelings of failure after all:

Adrienne Burgess, head of research at the Fatherhood Institute, said: “That experience of helplessness that Ives is saying is so dangerous, is, in fact, the perfect preparation for fatherhood: there are times as a parent when you can’t do anything to help your baby, when it’s crying all night and can’t be soothed.”

 

The Sunday Cat is Planning a Vacation May 29, 2010

Filed under: cats,Uncategorized — jj @ 10:56 pm

For the summer.

The thing is, trips are very tricky for cats.  They can travel over 2300 miles from home (hint, hint) and then be returned without so much as a ‘by your leave’. 

So she’s thinking she might do some virtual traveling in a Japanese animations.  But the problem here is that the cats can be so incredibly rude.  Really!

 

So she’s now thinking a surreal animation might be fun.  Especially if she can understand it.

The video above, Cat Soup, is Part I on a three part award winning short.  Parts Two and Three are here.  Both the short film and the series – the second entry above – are called (in translation) “Cat Soup”.

 

Some good news: Malawian couple to be freed May 29, 2010

Filed under: human rights,sexual orientation — stoat @ 6:26 pm

Earlier this month a gay couple in Malawi were imprisoned having been found guilty of crimes of sodomy and indecency. At the behest of the UN, they have now been (albeit begrudgingly) pardoned and will be freed. Ban Ki-moon is apparently pushing for the repeal of these anti-gay laws at the Malawian national assembley later this month. More here.

 

Intelligent article on Tiger Woods May 29, 2010

Filed under: race,religion — Jender @ 7:01 am

I didn’t really think that could happen any more. (Of course, arguably the article is much more about race than about Woods.) Read it here. It makes me kind of happy that this article is in the Sports section. I like the thought of people seeking sports news but ending up reading a really intelligent essay on race.

Sadly, another article provides a stark contrast. The Woods article is all about the gradual evolution of our thinking about our categorisation of people; this one reminds us that not everyone has been evolving. And that some of the people not evolving are really very scary. (I don’t think it represents progress that the hatred involved is, at least for some, a hatred of Muslims rather than a general anti-Asian sentiment. Though it is startling that one of the English Defence League spokespeople is named ‘Guramit Singh’.)

 

The NY Times gets sort of serious about Beauvoir May 28, 2010

Some of us were unhappy when the NY Times’ first notice of the new translation of The Second Sex focused on Beauvoir’s body and her sexuality.  Now there’s a review of the book that is supposedly an assessment of its intellectual merits.

Readers may find themselves, as I did, suspecting the particular reviewer, Francine du PLessix Gray, was not the best choice, despite her 1952 BA in philosophy from Barnard.  Thus she says:

The other pivotal notion at the heart of “The Second Sex” — a more problematic one, which Beauvoir came to on her own — is her belief that, in Parshley’s translation, “one is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” This preposterous assertion, intended to bolster her argument that marriage and motherhood are institutions imposed by men to curb women’s freedom, will be denied by any mother who has seen her toddler son eagerly grab for a toy in the shape of a vehicle or a gun, while at the same time showing a total lack of interest in his sister’s cherished dolls. It has also been disputed by certain feminist scholars, who would argue that many gender differences are innate rather than acquired.

Mothers’ observations, acute though they may be, are not going to tell us what is carried by the genes and in utero hormones.  The fact that some feminists would  agree with Gray’s conclusions indicates the diversity of views within feminism, if not a uniform competence.

I don’t think the reviewer is actually hostile to Beavoir or feminism.  But as her discussion of the “preposterous assertion” above indicates, she may not be engaged  enough with the relevant  issues.  Further,  she may be sufficiently in love with her gender role that she misses too much in what Beauvoir is saying:

“What a curse to be a woman!” Beauvoir writes, quoting Kier­kegaard. “And yet the very worst curse when one is a woman is, in fact, not to understand that it is one.” No one has done more than Beauvoir to explain the conditions of that curse, and no one has more eloquently, irately challenged us to turn that curse into a blessing.

 

CFP: (Re)Branding Feminism May 28, 2010

Filed under: CFP — Jender @ 3:27 pm

A conference hosted by the Institute of Germanic & Romance Studies (IGRS), Stewart House, 32 Russell Square, London, WC1B 5ND.

1st -2nd March 2011.

There has been a general recognition, if not acceptance, of many of feminism’s key concepts. But does this mean that it has ceased to assert itself as a unique movement? Indeed, should feminism be (re)branded in an age when all ideologies are subject to market forces? And what should this rebranding consist of?

Two years on from the stimulating ‘Where are we now? A workshop on women and heterosexuality’ hosted by the IGRS, this conference will address some of the issues raised then to question the place of feminism in the twenty-first century. While there has been ambivalent press and general apathy towards those issues that once encouraged women to put the political into the personal, it is increasingly women themselves who think there is nothing more to discuss. Why has there been a decline in the link between the personal and the ideological? Do we need a different kind of feminism to meet the cultural, political and academic needs of a younger generation?

Topics might include but are not limited to:

Are sisters doing it for themselves?

Feminism on the frontline

I can be a real bitch

Family romances

Home-makers and career women

God was/is a woman

Feminism and the sex industry

Feminist renaissance

Feminism is bollocks

Rebranding feminism

Pub talk

Abstracts between 200-300 words that explore any aspect of (re)branding feminism are sought as are poster submissions of 200 – 300 words on any topic related to rebranding feminism. Submit poster ideas and abstracts in a word document or .pdf.

Please send abstracts and poster ideas to both Jean Owen (ojean27@yahoo.com) and Elisha Foust (elishafoust@googlemail.com) by 5pm 1 October 2010.

 

Student Disrespect For Non-White, Non-Male Teachers May 28, 2010

Filed under: academia,gender,hostile workplace,race,sex — Jender @ 11:38 am

Balk sends us this post showing higher rates of rudeness to women faculty. And Ebony Utley has written a very disturbing account of her experiences teaching as an African American woman– including such questions as “are your boobs real?”.

 

Fellowship Opportunity: Philosophy in Public Life May 28, 2010

Filed under: academia — Jender @ 10:09 am

Jack Weinstein writes:

I was hoping you would post the following call for applications. We have set up our fellowships precisely so those with families and faculty who do not have the luxury of going places for six months have research opportunities. And while the institute fellows program, being new, has not been fortunate enough to attract a significant number of women applicants, our radio show Why has highlighted numerous women and feminist topics. I hope you will consider passing the following announcement to your readers. Thanks!

And indeed it looks like a great opportunity! Do consider applying:

Applications for 2010-2011 Visiting Fellowships at the Institute for Philosophy in Public Life are now being accepted.
The deadline for applications is July 1, 2010.

The Institute for Philosophy in Public Life is dedicated to two project: cultivating philosophy amongst the general public and bridging popular philosophy with academic research. This includes not only providing resources and opportunities for those interested in engaging with general audiences but also providing a venue for the presentation of their work. IPPL hopes to advance public philosophy by advocating the position that such work ought to count towards tenure and promotion.

IPPL Fellowships are both invited by the director and chosen via open competition. Any interested party is encouraged to apply, and prospective applicants are welcome to contact the director informally to ask for advice or to “test the waters” for their suitability and competitiveness.

An IPPL Visiting Fellowship is intended for philosophical professionals who seek an intensive short-term period to work on a specific project free from the intrusions of daily work and family responsibilities, and who wish to translate that same project into language easily understood by general audiences. Visiting fellows are in residence at the institute for two weeks. They receive travel, meal, housing allowances, a $1,000 stipend, access to the University of North Dakota library and all relevant university resources, a $500 grant to purchase research materials to be housed within the UND Chester Fritz Library, and an office within which to work. In exchange, visiting fellows are expected to make at least two public presentations suitable to lay audiences and write a ten to fifteen page article for publication either online or in the North Dakota Humanities Council magazine On Second Thought. Normally, IPPL grants three – four visiting fellowships per year.
Regional applicants are encouraged to apply, but are not exempt from the two-week residence requirement.

For application information, go here.

For more information, contact ippl@und.edu.

 

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell May 28, 2010

Filed under: glbt — Jender @ 10:06 am

The house has voted for repeal. And, as J-Bro notes, even right-wing military bloggers are on board with repeal. Here’s one of them:

If I am lying by the road bleeding, I don’t care if the medic coming to save me is gay. I just hope he is one of those buff gay guys who are always in the gym so he can throw me over his shoulder and get me out of there.

 

Infuriating editorial of the day May 27, 2010

Filed under: Uncategorized — redeyedtreefrog @ 7:23 pm

If your blood pressure is feeling up for it, you might want to read Andrew Irvine’s latest tirade against university hiring policies. Called “The real discrimination at universities is against men,” it’s available here. Clearly some comments/letters to the editor are warranted. Irvine, a full professor in philosophy at the University of British Columbia, is also the author of “Jack and Jill and Employment Equity,” Dialogue, vol. 35 (1996), no. 2, 255-291, available here.

 

taking Nietzsche very seriously? May 27, 2010

Filed under: academia,critical thinking,Uncategorized — jj @ 2:22 pm

 Brian Leiter writes:

This is very odd, and, one hopes, it is simply the product of just bad writing:  NEH summer stipends may not be used for “projects that seek to promote a particular political, philosophical, religious, or ideological point of view.”  Won’t this prevent most philosophers from applying, unless they’re writing a survey piece?  One assumes that, given the list, by “philosophical” they mean something closer to “political” and “ideological,” and not someone proposing to defend four-dimensionalism or compatibilism or epistemic internalism …

I thought BL must be right until I remembered a comment on one of our recent posts.  SeanH quoted Leiter quoting Nietzsche:

“[Philosophers] all pose as if they had discovered and reached their real opinions through the self-development of a cold, pure, divinely unconcerned dialectic…; while at bottom it is an assumption, a hunch, indeed, a kind of ‘intuition’…that they defend with reasons they have sought after the fact. They are all advocates [Advoktaen] who resent that name, and for the most part even wily spokesmen for their prejudice which they baptize ‘truths’–and very far from having the courge of the conscience that admits this, precisely this, to itself…”

Is, then, all philosophy ideology?  Or at least as practiced today?  Is the NEH just taking Nietzsche very seriously?

(Since the net is infamous for failure in communication, perhaps I should note this post is something of a joke.  But not entirely.  For example, Cartesian assumptions about what isolated philosophical reflection can discover seem still alive and well.  I myself regard much of philosophy of mind as the product of woefully unexamined  dogma, though the details of this are not necessarily germaine.  Do readers have other examples of the ideology present in today’s philosophy?  Maybe with a little more detail than I have given so far?)

 

Academic Boycott of Middlesex May 27, 2010

Filed under: academia — Jender @ 2:12 pm

There is now a call for an academic boycott of Middlesex, with the full support of the philosophy department. Spread the word far and wide, especially to non-philosophers. And commit to the boycott here.

The text is as follows:

We the undersigned therefore commit ourselves to an academic boycott of Middlesex University until it shows evidence of full reinstatement and continued support for its philosophy program.

Prior to such reinstatement, we will refuse to act as external examiners or to deliver talks at the school. We will encourage colleagues to reject job offers at Middlesex. We will refuse to visit campus for any reason other than to protest the decision to close the philosophy program. We will, in short, cease to engage with Middlesex as a legitimate academic institution.

 

A mother’s life and a church’s moral failure? May 27, 2010

Of course the RC Church thinks only a bishop can make some judgments, but perhaps we should judge this bishop.

Here’s what happened:

Sister Margaret was a senior administrator of St. Joseph’s Hospital in Phoenix. A 27-year-old mother of four arrived late last year, in her third month of pregnancy. According to local news reports and accounts from the hospital and some of its staff members, the mother suffered from a serious complication called pulmonary hypertension. That created a high probability that the strain of continuing pregnancy would kill her.

“In this tragic case, the treatment necessary to save the mother’s life required the termination of an 11-week pregnancy,” the hospital said in a statement. “This decision was made after consultation with the patient, her family, her physicians, and in consultation with the Ethics Committee.”

Sister Margaret was a member of that committee…the bishop of Phoenix, Thomas Olmstead, ruled that Sister Margaret was “automatically excommunicated” because she assented to an abortion.

“The mother’s life cannot be preferred over the child’s,” the bishop’s communication office elaborated in a statement.

The bishop doesn’t seem to have characterized the decision correctly.  There are two options:  (a) do nothing and it is highly  likely the mother and fetus both die, and four children are left motherless or (b) perform an abortion and the 11 week old fetus dies.

Nicholas Kristoff, the NY Times columnist writing about the report, calls for a public outcry to retify this injustice.  What do you think?

 

Feminist Philosophers Emeritae May 27, 2010

Filed under: academia,ageing,aging,feminist philosophy — Jender @ 12:06 pm

It’s a sign of the successes of feminist philosophy that there is now a significant and growing number of retired feminist philosophers. (And with current economic conditions, more may be retiring early.) Kate Lindeman is urging that we pay some attention to this group, and she’s quite right to do so. While some may be happy to leave their philosophical work behind, others are eager to remain engaged. So we should think about ways to help with this. Kate suggests that we need to:

1. Overcome the PERCEPTION that emerita/ae are no longer part of
philosophy.

2.Provide some vehicles to facilitate integration [practical
things like those we did re: women with children]

3. Offer vehicles for emeritae – especially those not living in
academic oriented communities.

And she has some suggestions for how we could go about doing this:

1. APA and even SWIP, for the most part, have been for ‘currently employed or at least employable’ academic philosophers. We should try to change this.

2. Encourage younger scholars and emeritae to co-author or co-edit, an excellent opportunity for both.

3. Invite emeritae to give papers.

4. Make conferences, etc more accessible to older philosophers who may be constrained by both health and income– web-based events and video links may help here.

5. Publicise that emeritae are welcome– e.g. in the group eligible for travel grants/bursaries.

6. Create a list of emeritae who are interested in speaking at conferences, guest-lecturing, etc.

7. Create a SWIP Emeritae?

8. Do a conference or volume on the issue.

What else can we do? Please brainstorm in the comments! (Thanks to Sally Haslanger and Ann Garry as well as Kate Lindeman.)

 

CFP: Under-represented Groups in Philosophy May 25, 2010

Filed under: CFP,events,minorities in philosophy — stoat @ 9:09 pm

CALL FOR PAPERS
Under-represented Groups in Philosophy
November 26th 2010
Cardiff University

A SWIP-UK/ BPA conference
Supported by: The Mind Association, The Aristotelian Society

Keynote speakers
Professor Helen Beebee (Birmingham University, UK)

http://www.ptr.bham.ac.uk/staff/beebee.shtml

Professor Louise Antony (UMass, Amherst, USA)

http://www.umass.edu/philosophy/faculty/faculty-pages/antony.htm

Organisers: Dr Jules Holroyd, Dr Alessandra Tanesini

CALL FOR PAPERS
Papers that address any aspect of the problem of under-representation within the profession, or strategies for responding to these problems and their philosophical underpinnings, or suitably related issues are invited for submission.

Abstracts or short papers of up to 3000 words should be sent to: HolroydJ[at]cardiff.ac.uk suitably prepared for anonymous refereeing.

The deadline for submission is August 10th 2010. Decisions will be made as promptly as possible.

EVENT RATIONALE
This conference aims to focus attention on the following topics;

a)identifying the specific problems that minorities in philosophy encounter, especially those that may perpetuate or sustain that minority status;

b)articulating the philosophical concepts and frameworks that may be of use in thinking about these problems;

c)identifying strategies that might be employed in attempting address gender imbalances and the underrepresentation of disabled people and individuals of minority racial or ethnic identities

d)exploring the philosophical underpinnings of these strategies, and critically assessing them.
(more…)

 

Middlesex: It’s getting worse. May 25, 2010

Filed under: academia — Jender @ 7:38 pm

From the Save Middlesex Philosophy Blog:

Some Middlesex University Philosophy students, along with Philosophy professors Peter Osborne, Peter Hallward, and Christian Kerslake, were suspended from the University this afternoon. Hallward and Osborne were issued with letters announcing their suspension from the University with immediate effect, pending investigation into their involvement in the recent campus occupations. The suspension notice blocks them from entering University premises or contacting in any way University students and employees without the permission of Dean Ed Esche (e.esche@mdx.ac.uk) or a member of the University’s Executive.

As John Protevi writes:

Administrators at other universities are carefully monitoring this situation and due to a ratcheting effect, if these suspensions are not overturned by international protest, they will become common practice. We must prevent this administrative bullying of our colleagues, who were doing nothing but attempting to present their side of the case to public opinion.

What can you do?

Please forward this information to colleagues and to any listservs you may belong to.

Please sign the online petition at: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/save-middlesex-philosophy.html. Please include your institutional affiliation and location.

Please write a letter of protest by email, and in hard copy, concerning the original decision, the suspensions, or both. If you have already written in protest of the original decision, please consider writing again to protest the suspensions, which are in some sense an even more serious matter, as they strike at the very heart of academic freedom itself.

a. Examples of previous letters are here: http://savemdxphil.com/category/letters-of-support/

b. Email addresses of the Board of Governors of Middlesex University are here: michael@partridges.org.uk; A.Gajownik@mdx.ac.uk; A.Durant@mdx.ac.uk; thelindens@googlemail.com; andrew.parsons@rlb-law.com; avrobinson1@tiscali.co.uk; l_spence1@sky.com; Bridget.Rulski@guardian.co.uk; colin.hughes@guardian.co.uk; T.Cockerton@mdx.ac.uk; P.A.Johnson@mdx.ac.uk; jritterman@blueyonder.co.uk; dinagray@btinternet.com; j.alleyne@mdx.ac.uk; geoff.lambert2@ntlworld.com; W.Ahmad@mdx.ac.uk; J.Compton-Bishop@mdx.ac.uk; j.mulroy1@btinternet.com; K.A.Bell@mdx.ac.uk; lorna.cocking@btinternet.com; M.House@mdx.ac.uk; M.Keen@mdx.ac.uk; m.driscoll@mdx.ac.uk; PeterCheeseman1@aol.com; Peter.Thomas2@justice.gsi.gov.uk; RS1000@live.mdx.ac.uk; stephen.hand@lr.org; s.knight@mdx.ac.uk; T.Kelly@mdx.ac.uk; T.Butland@mdx.ac.uk; e.esche@mdx.ac.uk

c. Please follow your email with a hard copy letter on departmental letterhead. The postal address is:

Board of Governors
Middlesex University in London
The Burroughs
London NW4 4BT England

d. Personal letters are great; departmental letters are even better.

e. If you agree to have your letter published on the Save Middlesex Philosophy website, you should BCC savemdxphil@gmail.com.

f. If you have a blog, please make a post on the situation and link to http://savemdxphil.com.

 

Do antelopes lie to get sex? May 25, 2010

Filed under: science,sex,Uncategorized — jj @ 2:21 pm

The NY Times reports on those tricky antelopes:

This is a story about deception and sex in the wild plains of Kenya.  

Antelope deception, that is, for the purposes of sex.  

During mating season, a male topi antelope will try to keep females in heat from leaving his territory by pretending that a predator might be in the area, according to a study that will appear in the July issue of The American Naturalist.When a female appears to be leaving, the male will run in front of her, freeze in place, stare in the direction that she is going and snort loudly. Typically, that snort means that a predatory lion or cheetah was spotted, but in this case the male is faking it.

 Anthropomorphizing can be cute, but one could worry this goes too far.  However, the original article provides a definition of deceiving that can help a bit:  

“acts from the normal repertoire of the agent, deployed such that another individual is likely to misinterpret what the acts signify, to the advantage of the agent” 

Still, one wonders why the “other individual” is misinterpreting, and what the misinterpretation amounts to.  Presumably, the female  antelope’s reaction  is appropriate as a reaction to an alarm signal.  Perhaps the idea is that she misinterprets his intentions.  However, this suggests that she sees other antelopes as minded creatures having intentions, which attributes fairly heavy cognitive machinery to her.  Further, since male topi antelopes apparently do this quite a bit, one suspects she will not be surprised at the outcome.

 The journal article is free and it contains a number of examples of lies misleading actions by members of various species.

 

A Discussion You May Want to Join May 25, 2010

Filed under: feminist philosophy — Jender @ 2:03 pm

Josh Glasgow writes:

I wanted to alert you to a discussion we’re going to have next week at PEA Soup. In our partnership with the journal, Ethics, an e-copy of Elizabeth Brake’s new article, “The Case for Minimal Marriage: What Political Liberalism Implies for Marriage Law,” is being made available for free to our readers. PEA Soup will then host a discussion of the article, introduced by Cheshire Calhoun, beginning Tuesday, June 1. We thought that your readers might be interested, in case you wanted to announce it on your blog. More information can be found here.

This sounds like an excellent thing. I hope lots of us go and join in!

 

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 261 other followers