To count or not to count July 15, 2010

Brian Leiter helpfully lists some new books in philosophy and one is an anthology. That means there will be a collection of papers, and it will contain some number of papers by women, given we allow “0″ to count as a number. So how many are by women philosophers? Do we really want to know? Still more, does anyone really want to count? Further, it is a Routledge Companion; we already put some effort into discovering that another companion volume in ethics contains 68 essays, with 4 from women.

Still, having counted, let me share the fact that the The Routledge Companion to Nineteenth Century Philosophy edited by Dean Moyar (2010) contains 30 essays, with two by women.

Ethics and history of philosophy are traditionally areas that women are more highly represented than others, and Routledge’s figures here are remarkably low.

And we might as well add in information that otherwise remains in a comment by Wahine:

There were no plenary women speakers (out of 5 speakers in total) at the BSPS (British Society for the Philosophy of Science) Conference last week, and only two female speakers out of something like 12 at the Joint Session this weekend.

(My stress.)

The new Claude Steele book, Whistling Vivaldi, described here by Jender, suggests a way these cause harm that deserves our attention. Products and occasions of the marked under-representation of women do not just contribute to what Steele would label “the stigmatization of women in philosophy;” they also function to women as reminders of that stigmatization, thus producing stress that makes performing at our best harder.

Is philosophy finally a field toxic for women?

Women Priests and Sex Abuse July 15, 2010

Yeah, those totally deserve to be in the same category of sin. Thanks, Vatican.

Hurray for Argentina! July 15, 2010

From the NY TIMES:

Argentina’s Senate narrowly approved a measure early on Thursday authorizing same-sex marriages, making Argentina the first country in Latin America to allow gay couples to wed.

After 15 hours of debate, the Senate voted 33 to 27 in favor of the measure, which was sponsored by the government of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. For weeks, she waged a bitter war of words with the Roman Catholic Church over the measure.

Whistling Vivaldi: Read it. July 15, 2010

Claude Steele has written a wonderful book on stereotype threat, Whistling Vivaldi: And Other Clues to How Stereotypes Affect Us. Stereotype threat is a powerful phenomenon working to suppress the performance of those from stigmatised groups. (Where ‘stigmatised’ must be understood in a highly context-dependent way: women in maths, black people in academia more generally, whites in athletics, and so on.) In particular, it suppresses the performance of those who really care about doing well in the activity their group is stereotypically considered less good at. What seems to happen is that awareness of stereotypes makes the victim of stereotype threat tense up and focus on the negative expectations for their performance (and desire to overcome these expectations) rather than at the task at hand. (This is reflected physiologically, in heart beat and blood pressure.) This makes the victim underperform. But if something is done to relieve the threat the victim performs well. The results of Steele’s (and others’) studies are dramatic, and the book gives incredibly valuable guidance on how to alleviate stereotype threat. Just a few dramatic illustrations:

1. If you have 5-7 year-old girls colour in pictures of a girl holding a doll (which reminds them of gender stereotypes) before they do a maths test, they do much less well than if you have them colour in a landscape (Steele 170).

2. If you tell black students that the difficult test they’re about to take is a test of ability, they do less well than white students. But if you tell them you just want to study problem-solving processes they do just as well as white students (Steele 51).

3. If you get beginning black undergraduate students to read survey results showing that other black students felt ill at ease at first but then settled in well, they get substantially better grades. The stereotype threat is dissipated by narratives of success by others who are like them (Steele 165-166).

The book is also incredibly well-written and a fascinating narrative of the way that scientific discovery proceeds. One of the things that’s nice about it from a feminist epistemological perspectives is the way that it intermingles personal anecdotes with research studies, showing the way that each can affect the way that we understand the other.

Facebook skin lightening July 14, 2010

for men. In a step toward gender equality (but not one that should be taken!), Indian companies have started marketing skin whitening cream for men. And as a fun tie-in, Vaseline has created a skin lightening application for Facebook. Sigh. (Thanks, Frog!)

The many meanings of “Public Affairs”? July 13, 2010

From the WSJ:  The “upstart” political party, the Czech Public Affairs party, has published a calendar of some of its leading public office holders. 

Apparently this is seen by the participants as a feminist assertion of their attractiveness as women (and, in at least one case, an animal companion).  And in the era of Lady GaGa feminism, why not?  Member of Parliament as Playmate.

A possibly more mitigating explanation is that the display is a reaction to, and rejection of, the dreary Soviet controlled years of anti-fashion.

What do you think?  Want to see (a photo-shopped) Hilary Clinton in a black satin negligee?

This year has the highest proportion of women in the Czech parliament ever.  Since the Cabinet is still all male, it appears men remain on top.

Booking a Dutch Ferry? July 13, 2010

You’d better be married or a man.

(Thanks, Lydia!)

Worried about car theft? July 13, 2010

Buy a pink one. (Thanks, J-Bro!)

Valor in the Pursuit of Epistemic Justice July 13, 2010

Word reached us, thanks to the special cable linking feminist hot spots across the globe, about the business meeting held by a certain philosophical society at its annual meeting.  As the plans for the upcoming conference were being discussed, Jacqueline Taylor (philosophy, University of San Francisco) pointed out that important positions were going disproportionately to men.  As one should expect, Prof Taylor’s remark was not received with unreserved enthusiasm.  On the contrary…

When women are not counted as equally valued creators of knowledge as men, we suffer a kind of epistemic injustice.  Many women’s careers bear the marks of unjust treatment.  Conferences are exceptionally important for drawing attention to women’s work and, consequently, for helping to establish epistemic justice.  Conferences can equally contribute to the perpetuation of such injustice.

Prof Taylor is a regular reader of this blog, and so she is well aware that of the gendered conference campaign and its costs.  A woman who calls out members of the profession on issues about epistemic justice is hardly behaving winningly.  So let’s recognize her and others who step outside the expected patterns of behavior to try to create an awareness of these important issues.  They exhibit valor in the pursuit of epistemic justice.

(With thanks to the work of Miranda Fricker on epistemic injustice.)

Stoning July 12, 2010

It turns out to be far from clear whether or not Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani has actually been given a reprieve from her stoning sentence. But this we do know: even if Iran doesn’t stone her, they may well hang her. And there are fifteen more awaiting execution by stoning. So take a moment to sign this further petition.

(Thanks, Michele-Antoine and Isya.)

Nussbaum on Veil/Burka Bans July 12, 2010

A very good article, with some valuable arguments, like this one:

A third argument, very prominent today, is that the burqa is a symbol of male domination that symbolizes the objectification of women (that they are being seen as mere objects). A Catalonian legislator recently called the burqa a “degrading prison.” The first thing we should say about this argument is that the people who make it typically don’t know much about Islam and would have a hard time saying what symbolizes what in that religion. But the more glaring flaw in the argument is that society is suffused with symbols of male supremacy that treat women as objects. Sex magazines, nude photos, tight jeans — all of these products, arguably, treat women as objects, as do so many aspects of our media culture. And what about the “degrading prison” of plastic surgery? Every time I undress in the locker room of my gym, I see women bearing the scars of liposuction, tummy tucks, breast implants. Isn’t much of this done in order to conform to a male norm of female beauty that casts women as sex objects? Proponents of the burqa ban do not propose to ban all these objectifying practices. Indeed, they often participate in them.

Lovelace, Curie T-Shirts July 11, 2010

Surely you need something new to help you cope with the heat.

Thinkgeek have a new Heroine series, in which they’ve made up two teeshirts celebrating two wonderful ladies: Marie Curie (discovered radioactivity) and Ada Lovelace (invented computer programming).

They’re not only very lovely teeshirts, but the sale of each also donates a dollar to The Girl Effect, an organisation dedicated to helping girls out of the cycle of abuse, poverty and second-class citizenship.

Thanks, J-Bro!

Women’s (Philosophical) Works July 10, 2010

Rachel sends us a link to this website:

The Women’s Works provides a list of papers, books or chapters that could be used in undergraduate teaching, so that if an instructor wants to include more work by women in a syllabus, it is easier to do so. The site can be searched using Google, or papers can be listed by philosophical area or by author.

It was created by Cynthia Townley, Mitch Parsell and Albert Atkin. They write:

We were awarded a Macquarie University Learning and Teaching grant “Seeing Herself as a Philosopher” to develop the database. In 2009-10, we used the funds to employ a research assistant – Swantje Lorrimer – who has done most of the work compiling the recommendations. The content has been supplied by many individuals who responded to our requests for suggestions.

This seems like a great idea. Looking around a bit, it looks like the offerings are still a bit sparse (at least in the areas I checked). But they urge readers to send in suggestions. I’ve done so already, and you should too!

Defence of Marriage Act Unconstitutional July 9, 2010

From the Courage Campaign:

We won a major court victory for LGBT equality on Thursday. A federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that part of the notorious “Defense of Marriage Act” — which blocks the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriage — is unconstitutional.

This ruling is wonderful news and a huge victory in our fight to bring full equality to all Americans. But the federal government can appeal the ruling. It’s time to organize to ask our president to uphold equality by letting this decision stand.

Please join us in asking President Obama to direct the Justice Department to stand down and not appeal this ruling:

President Obama:

We, the undersigned, urge you to respect the federal judge’s decision ruling parts of the “Defense of Marriage Act” to be unconstitutional by directing the agencies under your control to not appeal this rulling.

This historic decision by Judge Joseph Tauro makes it clear that the “Defense of Marriage Act” was motivated by what he called “irrational prejudice.” There is no justification for continuing to defend this unconstitutional law in the courts.

We look to you to provide national leadership in support of full equality for all Americans. Please join us in welcoming this historic verdict by pledging to not appeal it to a higher court.

To sign, go here.

No stoning after all July 9, 2010

But maybe hanging. The fight goes on. It’s worth noting that the

death penalty [was] handed down on the basis of “judge’s knowledge” – a loophole that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present.

(Thanks, J-Bro and Jender-Parents.)

Help for your marriage July 8, 2010

Everyone knows that marital difficulties boil down to one thing: husbands farting in bed. Thank goodness, then, for this wonderful item – a duvet containing a carbon filter, to remove all the noxious gases emitting from his behind!

(If anyone knows whether or not this is a real product, do let us know.)

Toronto Closing its Center for Ethics July 8, 2010

This isn’t, however, the usual sort of closure decision made by bureaucrats with no knowledge of or respect for philosophy. The provost is eminent philosopher Cheryl Misak. She writes:

I am responding to you as the Provost of the University of Toronto, but also as an occasional participant in the Centre’s activities; as someone who works in the field of ethics; and, indeed, as the person who initially came up with the idea of a Centre for Ethics over a decade ago when I was Chair of the Department of Philosophy. At that point the proposal was set aside because we could not raise funds to endow the Centre, as we must if we are to offer visitorships in the economic climate in which publicly-funded universities find themselves. When the Centre was successfully launched through the exemplary initiative and commitment of its first director, that launch was made possible by seed funding provided by something called the Academic Initiatives Fund. There was a clear understanding that the University could not maintain this financial commitment in the long term, and thus that funds had to be raised from the private sector if it was going to be sustainable.

The Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science is working within a very difficult budget situation. He is on the way to pulling the Faculty out of it so as to preserve and enhance the excellent scholarship, research, and teaching that is at the heart of the University of Toronto. He and his Academic Planning Committee have come to the hard decision to close the Centre, while committing significant resources to support the research and teaching of ethics for a broader range of our community members, including our undergraduates. A committee to work out how to best use those resources is to be chaired by the Chair of the Department of Philosophy and will be entirely driven by faculty members working in ethics. While this decision is deeply disappointing for all those involved with the Centre for Ethics, I hope that you understand that very difficult decisions are constantly being made in a university under financial pressures. I assure you that the University of Toronto’s commitment to the finest research in and teaching of the subject of ethics is unwavering, despite this recent shift in how the Faculty of Arts and Sciences goes about it.”

But Joe Carens, also Toronto, responds:

I want to respond briefly to the standard letter that the Provost, Cheryl Misak, is sending to those who write in support of the Centre for Ethics at the University of Toronto. Her letter was posted previously on this blog. Cheryl is an eminent philosopher and a friend, but I think that her communication on this issue is misleading. One gets the impression from Cheryl’s letter that the Centre for Ethics had been expected to raise funds to sustain its activities and failed to do so, and also that the closure of the Centre is a regrettable necessity due to the financial crisis within the university. Neither is accurate.

The Centre was created five years ago under a university initiative to spark innovation. It was one of a few projects to which the university committed base funding, not “seed” money. It was always the plan that the Centre should raise major endowment over the long term, but the previous Dean who approved the Centre agreed that it would not be expected to do this in the first five years. The Centre has been very successful in raising funds for particular projects.

In the current climate, it may be necessary (if regrettable) for the University to close research centres that cannot pay for themselves, but it seems unreasonable to do so out of the blue, especially with one that has been as successful as the Ethics Centre at doing what it was previously asked to do. It would be far more reasonable to continue to support the Centre with university funding for a few years, perhaps at a reduced level, while expecting it to raise endowment or face closure.

Reading Cheryl’s letter you might think that the University of Toronto cannot afford even this temporary reprieve. I agree that the budget crisis is serious. There is a $50 million deficit in the Faculty of Arts and Science that has to be eliminated. However, the Dean is not proposing to save the Centre’s $308,000 budget. Rather he is proposing to redeploy much or all of it.

The University of Toronto faces a choice about how to use the “significant resources” that it plans to devote “to support the research and teaching of ethics” to use Cheryl’s words. We could, on the one hand, spend those resources to preserve an already existing and thriving research centre, recognized as one of the three or four best in the world in the area of ethics, or we could, on the other hand, spend those resources on whatever “ethics-based educational initiatives” are eventually proposed by the committee that the Dean plans to construct. The Dean does face some hard decisions in balancing his budget but this should not be one of them.

If you any of have further knowledge of the situation, we’d be grateful. (My impression is that they are not actually cutting any jobs in doing this. Is that right?) If you want to join the facebook campaign to save the Center, go here.

More good! July 7, 2010

Two bits of good news in one day. Fab.

Gay and lesbian asylum seekers have won the right not to be deported from the UK if they would be persecuted in their home countries.

The supreme court unanimously allowed appeals from two men, from Cameroon and Iran, whose claims had earlier been turned down because officials said they could hide their sexuality by behaving discreetly.

The government accepted the ruling and said that policy on gay and lesbian asylum seekers would be changed with immediate effect.

For more, go here.

Obama, First Woman President July 7, 2010

Sigh. Bill Clinton’s black, Hillary Clinton’s a man, now Obama’s a woman– we really should have expected this. Wouldn’t it be nice if people could just realise that perhaps, just perhaps all these shocking deviations from gender and race generalisations count against the generality of these generalisations?? Nah– instead, let’s hold them up as freakish deviations, allowing us to cling more tightly than ever to the stereotypes.

(Thanks, Eris!)

UPDATE: Philosoraptor has pointed us to this awesome debunking of the linguistic “facts” in which the article was based.

Good. July 7, 2010

The US Justice Department is suing Arizona over its immigration law.

The Justice Department lawsuit charges that the Arizona law cracking down on illegal immigrants conflicts with federal law, would disrupt immigration enforcement and would lead to police harassment of those who cannot prove their lawful status. Filed in federal court in Arizona, it says the state’s measure is unconstitutional and asks a judge to stop it from taking effect.

(Thanks, M-A!)