7 thoughts on “A bit of GCC at the Eastern APA

  1. So, first of all, I should say that I think it’s awesome that the topic is getting this sort of mainstream attention.

    But. It’s hard not to find this session a little frustrating, and maybe a little ironic, at least on paper. First of all, the title – it seems to imply that it’s men who are doing the organizing. And then the lineup – it’s sad to see a panel on gendered conferences where three out of four speakers are male!

    Maybe the point is to highlight the efforts of men in this area? (Or something?) If so, I’d like to hear more about why that’s the focus, rather than just gender-equity efforts in the profession more generally.

  2. I’m going to second the first poster’s point. The first thing that struck me about this is the irony of having a session on how to create a gender-balanced conference, with only one woman involved.

  3. Golly. Sadness was not the reaction I expected. Let’s see:

    As the program says, the session is “Arranged by the APA Committee on the Status of Women,” so I hope people read that and appreciate that there’s more than one woman involved! Hilde Lindemann is chairing CSW and was the point-person to hold the group session. I’m also not the organizer, who would be the most excellent Nancy Bauer. When she asked me to be the chair of the session, I was very happy to say yes.

    Definitely the point is to highlight that men can, should, and occasionally do make efforts in this area! Women can, should, and do have some men in the profession as allies, and like a lot of women in the profession I’ve given presentation after presentation on gendered conferences. I’m a woman, and I’m usually on a panel of women, and women do a ton of the heavy lifting on the GCC. I don’t think it’s ironic that a panel of largely men would attend to this. I think it’s about time!

    My thought: How many workshops and panels related to the GCC must I participate in, composed of all or almost all women, before it is permissible to have a panel of men saying that they ALSO think they should do something? My conclusion: About twenty. Now that I’ve done over twenty, it’s time!

  4. Thank you for organizing this session, Kate, Hilde and Nancy and everyone else involved in it!

  5. Hi Kate,

    I want to reiterate that I think it’s awesome that this is being discussed at such a high profile venue, and I’m grateful to the organizers for making it happen.

    Nevertheless, I do feel a bit funny about a session the title and line-up of which suggests that it’s men speaking to men about things men can/should do. I’ve been to enough of those at gigs like the APA. So it’s frustrating to feel like – again, just from the looks of it on paper, I’m sure it won’t be like this in actual fact – a session on gendered conferences is this kind of session.

    I think it’s a great idea to involve (and celebrate!) male allies, and get them speaking at venues like this. But the explicitly (in the title) and implicitly (in the line-up) gendered presentation doesn’t seem like it’s the best way of forwarding the cause of gender equality in philosophy. Others will no doubt disagree, I’m sure! And again, I think it’ll be a great session. But I’m still personally a little uncomfortable with some aspects of the way its being presented.

Comments are closed.