Joint sessions and women in philosophy

I’ve just got back from the Joint Sessions in Aberdeen, which was much fun. There were plenty of interesting talks, and a good friendly atmosphere.

Some points of note:

1. there was a SWIP UK panel session of talks, which was well attended. The line up was: 

  • Marije Altorf, ‘After cursing the library …’ Women and philosophy: a case study; Dan O’Brien, A feminist interpretation of Hume on testimony;  Vera Tripodi, On the distinction between abstract and concrete objects; and Lina Papadaki Pornography: is there a connection between treating things as people and treating people as things?

This seemed to be a good forum for promoting work by and of interest to women in philosophy. For anyone who wants to find out more about SWIP UK, the website is here:

http://www.dur.ac.uk/swipuk/

 

2. My impression was that there were lots of women in attendance, and giving papers. I did a quick  count of the sex distribtution across papers given.

In the plenary sessions, M:9, F:4

In the graduate sessions, M:3, F:5

In the open sessions, M:69, F:26

Total: M:80, F: 35.

 

As pointed out in comments (thanks gaye!) this is rather far off 50%.

 

However, that there was a visible presence of women philosophers, especially at the more prestigious and well attended sessions (plenary and graduate) seems important.

In her much cited and hugely important paper, Haslanger (linked here)notes that schemas (the model with which she understands unconscious bias (from Valian)) tend to be activated when the individuals are perceived to be in a minority group – tipping point being 25-30%.

So having such a visible presence of women in philosophy may be doing good work in dislodging the clash of woman schemas with philospher schemas. One hopes…

 

On a less positive note, whilst the conference drew a fairly international crowd, there were very few non-white philosophers there. And all the papers I saw (which, in fairness, was a small proportion, approx 20) were by white philosophers.

 

(updated from comments, to remedy my maths errors! thanks again!)

6 thoughts on “Joint sessions and women in philosophy

  1. Hi there,
    my math brain tells me that 35 out of a total of 115 is far from 50%, and is in fact closer to 30%. Spin is also a feminist skill :) That would put the fem. phils. in the class of seeing themselves as a minority – if the sterotype/tipping point mentioned is also an accurate figure.

  2. just stumbled onto your blog and i think i’ve found heaven. feminism + philosophy + blogging. oh goodness.

  3. Doh! i knew i shouldn’t have been doing this so early in the morning (pre-coffee even!).
    A schoolkid error! shame.

    yup – nearer to 30%. might be just over the tipping point, but a close close call.

    Maybe one positive point (still!) is that the plenary and grad sessions – the most prestigious – were well represented. there it’s more like (get … brain … to … crunch…) M: 57%, F:43%.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s