“As I’ve just told @alicetiara, the comments on any article about feminism justify feminism. That is Lewis’s Law.”
A recent article entitled, “Donglegate: Why the Tech Community Hates Feminism” referenced Lewis’ Law, which is explained above. What do people think?
Also, I really hope the article linked above is mistaken about the increased popularity of MRAs.
Also also, Lewis’ Law, if sound, definitely applies to the article linked above.
Yesterday I was watching the Melissa Harris Perry (MHP) Show and legal scholar Kenji Yoshino talked about a possible paradox at play in regards to the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling on Prop 8 (and the other case that no one seems to reference by name). He brought up the following point: a group has to have a significant amount of political power in order to even make it to the Supreme Court, who will rule on whether they are being discriminated against. This can be restated as,
“A group must have an immense amount of political power before it will be deemed politically powerless by the Court.”
I can’t find the exact clip, though here is Sunday’s MHP show. And since I was forced to search the internet for another mention of Yoshino’s quote, I stumbled across a law review article he wrote on the topic (no pay wall!).
Today I was reminded of this paradox as I logged onto Facebook and was greeted with a newsfeed awash in red and pink:
a pink equals sign on a red background
(more after the jump)
It’s difficult to know where to start with this. The bare facts, as reported by the BBC website, are that an eighty-year old woman was left without food, water, or medication for nine days after the company responsible for her care was raided and shut down by the UK Border Agency. Sadly, she later died in hospital. The agency, it seems, had been illegally employing folks without papers, although I don’t think that much has been officially confirmed. There are so many things about this tragedy that make me angry. First off, care work is one of the most poorly paid jobs going. A 2010 report by the Low Pay Commission found that 9% of care workers were paid less than the minimum wage. Many were not being reimbursed for their travel costs. No surprise there, as caring has been – and still is – associated with women, and what has traditionally been considered ‘women’s work’ is always more poorly paid than traditionally masculine roles, no matter how important it may be. In addition, few care workers are union members, and as private companies have taken over – and made to compete for – the provision of care, this has led to reduced pay and poorer working conditions. Second, migrants without papers are one of the most easily exploited groups of people – lacking any official means to support themselves, they have to take any work they are offered, and their illegal status means that they have no power over their pay or working conditions. They cannot join a union to fight for a better deal, and they cannot complain if their jobs fail to meet the legally required standards. Third, the existence of such a vulnerable group of people, living in the shadows of our society, makes it harder for those with papers. Their pay and working conditions are driven down by the exploitation of illegal migrants, and they must now compete for work with people who can be paid less, made to work longer hours, and so on – people whom, from a certain perspective, it makes more sense to employ. And there we have it: a matrix of oppression, which leads to the various sufferings of care workers, folks without papers, and those who require care.
Makes for grim reading. From the courageous and awesome feminist philosopher Amy Masson.
On the night of my election I received a death threat which told me to ‘DIE BITCH DIE’ with a side note suggesting that this vitriol was deserved because of my feminist beliefs.
There’s a paradigm of a hostile climate based on gender
Sexual harassment is a primary definition by the EEOC of a hostile work environment. The most publicized cases of discrimination involve women who have been propositioned for sexual favors in the workplace. Women and men can experience this kind of favoritism that results in a tangible change of status or benefits by their employer. This abusive behavior can be displayed by any employee or independent contractor, not necessarily a supervisor, to be relevant in creating a hostile work environment. Third party filings for sexual harassment are acceptable in order to protect the complainant from retaliation.
Read more: EEOC Hostile Work Environment Definition | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5402802_eeoc-hostile-work-environment-definition.html#ixzz2AQ1J2apY
If you are considering complaining against gender based discrimination, there are a couple of problems you may encounter unless there’s been something like attempted sexual contact. One is the sheer ignorance you may encounter. Unbelievable as it may seem, people working with legal aspects of gender discrimination complaints for decades may think that if another woman is involved in actions against you, then that’s a reason for doubting it is gender discrimination.
More importantly, since there’s no law against people being assholes, how do you make the case that it’s gender discrimination, not plain assholery? Given, again, there was nothing sexual about the occasions.
One way is to point out a pattern of unequal treatment. So if the guys are being paid more for equal or lesser work, or they get support that you don’t, you can cite that. This means, as the site above says, you want to document things, such as the days when the profs invited the guys for a beer after a talk, but not the women.
I’m hoping that others who have dealt with this problem can step in with some good advice. And if you think you are heading from trouble, the simple advice on the site mentioned above is worth taking very seriously.
[I wrote this after reading one person's reaction to the What's it like site. She was moved to tears. It is awful to think that all the not-advertly-sexual behavior reported could be judged simple assholery. Life can be made intolerable, but that's legally ok? Even though any academic woman would see the sexism very quickly?]
A reader on this post asks an excellent question, and I’m hoping others who are wise will have some useful thoughts. The question is what to do when faced with a really awful environment in one’s department, which includes denial that there is a problem. Is a climate survey useless? What are other first steps one could take?
Suppose the problem really is in the environment, but you can medicate your child to help them cope. A lot of people may medicate themselves to help them through a bad situation. Facing an MRI in a closed machine (i.e., you’re in the clanging tunnel for possibly an hour)? Xanax can seem reasonable if you are claustrophobic. A wedding with your most difficult relatives? Maybe xanax there too, or a martini or whatever. How about a bad work situation? A pill a day to keep anger away?
For myself I’d say absolutely not in the last case (clarification added in light of comment one). For a healthy child with a poor school environment that makes concentration and learning really too hard? C/D unmedicated, A/B on pills. I feel fortunate not to have to decide this one. Some people do have tO choose between these alternatives:
CANTON, Ga. — When Dr. Michael Anderson hears about his low-income patients struggling in elementary school, he usually gives them a taste of some powerful medicine: Adderall.
The pills boost focus and impulse control in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Although A.D.H.D is the diagnosis Dr. Anderson makes, he calls the disorder “made up” and “an excuse” to prescribe the pills to treat what he considers the children’s true ill — poor academic performance in inadequate schools.
“I don’t have a whole lot of choice,” said Dr. Anderson, a pediatrician for many poor families in Cherokee County, north of Atlanta. “We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.”
Dr. Anderson is one of the more outspoken proponents of an idea that is gaining interest among some physicians. They are prescribing stimulants to struggling students in schools starved of extra money — not to treat A.D.H.D., necessarily, but to boost their academic performance.
It is not yet clear whether Dr. Anderson is representative of a widening trend. But some experts note that as wealthy students abuse stimulants to raise already-good grades in colleges and high schools, the medications are being used on low-income elementary school children with faltering grades and parents eager to see them succeed.
“We as a society have been unwilling to invest in very effective nonpharmaceutical interventions for these children and their families,” said Dr. Ramesh Raghavan, a child mental-health services researcher at Washington University in St. Louis and an expert in prescription drug use among low-income children. “We are effectively forcing local community psychiatrists to use the only tool at their disposal, which is psychotropic medications.”
Dr. Nancy Rappaport, a child psychiatrist in Cambridge, Mass., who works primarily with lower-income children and their schools, added: “We are seeing this more and more. We are using a chemical straitjacket instead of doing things that are just as important to also do, sometimes more.”
Feminist Philosophers’ sister blogs What Is It Like to Be A Woman in Philosophy and This is What a Philosopher Looks Like are the latest targets of a fauxphilnews parody. The spoof site reports that another marginalized group of philosophers, zombies, have created their own “What Is It Like” blog to educate readers about obstacles faced by zombie philosophers.
Excerpt:
“I think the expansion from women to other marginalized groups is the natural next step,” says Noam Chompsky, the site’s unfortunately named creator. “Zombies typically rank somewhere between pedophiles and atheists in terms of the general level of distrust among the public, and I think some of that distrust finds its way into the discipline.”
But are there good news stories for zombie philosophers? Can we look forward to a What We’re Doing About What It’s Like to Be a Zombie in Philosophy blog?
It’s been a while since we reported on breastfeeding fuss here on femphils, so I thought it would be nice to toss one in again (thanks to @allenstairs for pointing this one out to me): controversy about military moms breastfeeding in uniform.
Some people equal that to urinating and defecating in uniform (i.e. should be in private). I briefly wondered what they have been fed as infants.
Read the article here.
Recent Comments