A post here a short while ago looked at the relatively low number of women in philosophy and considered a recent discussion of some of the causes. One focused on is the aggressive style too frequently employed in philosophy. A lot of women do not like it. Unfortunately, that can make it seem as though we are just too gentle and timid for the men’s playing field, which does not seem true.
In looking at absracts and articles by Maria Lugones yesterday, I was reminded of another and much more important downside. I wonder if it isn’t this that makes us more disinclined to find the sport of philosophy rewarding when it is indeed played like a competitive sport.
A significant bit is underlined below. One could argue that a huge part of the problem with aggressive philosophy is not that it scares women, but that it subverts its supposed purpose; namely, communal and constructive philosophy. Flashes of philosophical insight – suddenly getting what else is at stake, for example – may indeed be just that, flashes. But it takes time to figure out the best articulation of an insight, and its value. Complexity and uncertainly need to be admitted, unless one is just going to quickly crank through the surrounding logical implications of a first articulation. Other things being equal, the best discussions would open up alternatives, not close them down.
To the extent that Lugones is describing the kind of setting that allows for exploration of insight and meaning, it is not the one that reigns in most philosophical settings. Or so one could argue.
|Title||Multiculturalismo radical y feminismos de mujeres de color|
|Source||Revista Internacional de Filosofia Politica, vol. 25, pp. 61-75, July 2005|
|Descriptors||Feminism; Multiculturalism; Political Philosophy; Resistance; Women Of Color|
|Abstract||At the very logical core of the movement towards radical multiculturalism and women of color feminisms is a shift from a logic of oppression to a logic of resistance. Radical, structural or polycentric multiculturalism is a radical response to the Eurocentrism that has accompanied the history of Western colonialism. The passionate desire to communicate across nondominant differences that establishes a cross-cultural relationship, in an egalitarian and unprecedented way, between histories that we know are interrelated is fostered by cognitive attitudes that valorize open-ended understanding, complexity, and uncertainty. This multiculturalist position prepares us to bridge the barriers among marginalized resistant knowledges.|