It’s not “group sex” when it’s “gang rape”

Worst headline ever from Jezebel: “Group Sex Is The Latest Disturbing Teen Trend”

Second sentence of the article reads: “Researchers found significant number of teen girls are having group sex, and it’s often non-consensual.”

There’s more: “The majority of the girls, “reported being pressured, threatened, coerced, or forced to participate in MPS at least once.” One third of the girls said they’d used alcohol or drugs during their last group sex experience, and half of those girls said they were forced to use the substances by their partner.”

The average age was 15.6.

At the very end of the article, the author says that “multi-person sex” isn’t really the right term since most of it was non-consensual. Neither is “group sex” then.

Please, let’s call rape, rape and not something else.

Looking forward to this!

Feministing launches new column on feminism and academia, The Scholarly Feminist.

“The Scholarly Feminist series will aim to bridge the academic/online divide, allow academics to showcase their important work, connect online conversations that are also taking place in the classroom (and other academic venues), and relate feminist and queer theory to feminist blogosphere discussions. Bring it, brainy feminists!”

Accessibility and the Eastern APA

Some questions to consider, from Sophia Wong on the wphtf mailing list:

As many of you will be at the Eastern APA, here is a list of questions off the top of my head, that you might ask yourselves as you attend. Please, everyone, read through, ask for clarifications, and add or revise these questions as you see fit.

1. How did you access the APA program? If it was online, was the format used accessible to visually impaired readers? Could a person using a screen reader have accessed the information in the program?

2. When you approach the APA hotel, do you see wheel-chair accessible entrances?

3. Are there people at the registration table who are clearly marked as people to whom Accessibility questions may be addressed?

4. Are accessible bathrooms clearly marked on any maps provided?

5. Roughly how many people with visible disabilities do you notice attending the APA?

6. Does everyone wear their name tag in a clearly visible location on their body? This is an accessibility issue for people who have trouble recognizing faces and/or remembering names.

7. Are there spaces set aside in every meeting room, where wheelchair users can park without having to ask others to move chairs aside for them?

8. Are there chairs clearly marked where people with disabilities who need to sit close to the speaker (to make eye contact and to hear well) can sit?

9. If the speakers use Powerpoint, slides, or videos, is everything clearly captioned so that deaf philosophers can follow along easily?

10. Are there any ASL interpreters at the APA?

11. If the speakers distribute printed materials (handouts), are these handouts available in large font (18 point or larger) upon request?

12. Does every room have adequate microphones – one for each speaker to use, and at least one microphone where audience members queue up to ask question? (Alternatively, there may be one or two wireless mics passed around so people don’t have to stand to ask questions.)

13. Is there a clearly designated Quiet Room where people who cannot tolerate bright lights and noisy crowds can retreat to sit quietly without being bothered by cell phone conversations or Internet use?

14. When you attend each session, please note where the nearest restroom is located. How far away from the session room is it? How long does it take you to get there and back? Is there an accessible stall in that restroom? If not, where is the restroom with an accessible stall? How long does it take you to get there and back?

15. How long are the breaks between sessions? If you were a person with a disability trying to get from one session to the next, would you have enough time to use the restroom in between, or make a phone call?

Sophia means this to be a starting point, so feel free to add to the list!

Androcentric error example

One kind of androcentric error is one that results from taking male as the norm. Here’s a nice one:

Many M.D.s have bought this fallacious line that the optimal weight for women in terms of their health is what M.D.s call normal weight, a BMI between 18.5 and 25. And they have thought this to be true because women with higher BMIs exhibit a series of physiological measures that are indeed risk factors for disease in men. But they are not systematically risk factors for disease in women. If you actually look at the data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and data from studies done in other countries, the optimal weight for women who have had a kid is what doctors currently call “overweight.”

“Watching Porn– that’s sort of where you get your grasp of what’s normal”

A quote from a teenager in a recent study. And many more say similar things. So the idea that porn has a kind of authority due to its education role isn’t just a wacky thought from Catharine MacKinnon. Interestingly, though, the study’s authors argue that this shows “pupils should be taught how to evaluate porn in sex education lessons.” They continue,

To be unable to critique imagery is equivalent to being illiterate in the modern world…We need to help young people to resist peer-group pressure to consume porn or to respond to partners’ requests for sex they’ve seen in porn.

(Thanks, S!)

the more things change, the more they stay the same

At least when it comes to the numbers of women in philosophy in US departments with doctoral programs. The list “Tenured/tenure-track faculty women at 98 U.S. doctoral programs in philosophy” has been updated. For the 2011 version, look here.

With some provisos (the information is only as accurate as department websites, for example) the totals look like this:

Total number of tenured/tenure-track faculty at Top-51 Doctoral Programs in the 2011 Gourmet Report: 1018

Number of women on tenured/tenure-track appointments at Top-51 Doctoral Programs in Gourmet Report: 224

Percentage of women on tenured/tenure-track appointments at Top-51 Doctoral Programs in Gourmet Report: 20.00%

Thanks Julie Van Camp for doing this.