The Society for Philosophy and Psychology has just issued a cfp here. There is a list of invited speakers and a special session on experimental philosophy listed.
There are 20 invited speakers listed in the central program and 9 listed in the experimental philosophy session.
There are no women philosophers listed on the main invited program. There are similarly no women philosophers listed in the experimental philosophy session.
There are 4 women who are invited speakers, but they are from other fields. The 4 program chair/co-chairs are all women.
If you look at the site to check the figures, you’ll need to know the very distinguished Fei Xu is a woman.
A confession: I thought this was rare. That folks in philosophy at least know not to say things like “That’s a great paper for a girl” or “We’ve already got a woman”. (I thought they might well *think* these things– but that they at least knew they were socially unacceptable to say.) But a few weeks ago I heard about the first being said at a graduate conference in the UK, and last week I heard about the second being said by someone on a search committee in the US (in response to the question “Why not consider X [a woman]?”) Both totally without irony, and both very recently. And I was really shocked. (Though perhaps you aren’t.) There are lots of very interesting discussions taking place in recent days about uncovering non-obvious or structural sources of problems for women in philosophy (e.g. here and here and here). All these are very important, but it’s important to also remember that the totally blatant stuff isn’t yet gone. Why aren’t there more women in philosophy departments? One reason is that some departments think one is plenty.
Question: Have you seen much stuff this stupidly obvious lately?