CFP Is Gender Still Relevant?

[I have been informed there is some leeway in deadline if you email the organiser]

Call for papers: Is Gender Still Relevant? 

16-17th September 2014, University of Bradford

Despite over 30 years of campaigning and policy, why does gender remain a key issue today?

The ‘Is Gender Still Relevant?’ seminar, sponsored by the British Academy, examines the state of play in gender research in the historic disciplines, and asks if (and why) we still need to debate gender issues, including feminism, masculism and gender fluidity.

The event will discuss both research and academic practice and welcomes participation from all career stages, particularly early career scholars. We are also keen on perspectives from all genders – this isn’t just about women!

We invite abstracts for short papers from colleagues of all career stages and across the Historical Disciplines (in its broadest sense – including History of Science, and cross overs between humanities and sciences). We would particularly encourage workshop papers addressing the themes of: gender and representation; architecture and space; and gender identities past and present.

In addition, if you are an early career scholar and would be interested in collaboratively organising an interdisciplinary workshop within the event on either gender and representation, or gender identities past and present (or another topic we have not thought of) then please let us know.

Deadline for abstracts: 23rd June 2014

For architecture and space abstracts, please email Emily Fioccoprile and Emily Cuming

For gender and representation abstracts, please contact Daniel Grey and Kristin Leith

For all other abstracts, please email or contact


Confirmed Participants include:

Prof Roberta Gilchrist, University of Reading (FBA and event champion)

Prof Maggie Andrews, University of Worcester

Thomas Dowson, Independent researcher

Prof Patricia Skinner, Swansea University

Prof Helen King, Open University

Dr Diane Bolger, Edinburgh University

Prof Ray Laurence, University of Kent

Dr Anne Murphy, University of Hertfordshire

Dr Garthine Walker, Cardiff University

For further details, including how to register, please visit      Contact details:


Organising committee:

Dr Karina Croucher, University of Bradford

Dr Hannah Cobb, University of Manchester

Emily Fioccoprile, University of Bradford

Debbie Hallam, University of Bradford

Joanne McNicholls, University of Bradford

Natalie Atkinson, University of Bradford


Who is fed up? Part I

Plenty of people are fed up with the current treatment too many women receive in the philosophical community. This blog was offered the opportunity to post an open letter to the profession on this topic. We reacted enthusiastically. The letter is long, but contains many valuable observations. Rather than edit it, I’m putting it up in two parts.


An Open Letter to My Colleagues in Philosophy:

The most recent bout of sexual harassment scandals has brought on yet another round of tortured conversations about women in philosophy and what we can do about the problem of sexual harassment in the field. It is a good thing that and that these problems are coming to light and that people are finally taking note of widespread misbehavior and abuse that occurs across the profession, and I believe that there are genuinely well-intentioned male (and female) philosophers who are sincere in their desire to learn more about what they can do to improve the situation. But I continually encounter responses to these complaints in casual conversations that frustrate me almost to the point of tears, and if I have to summon the energy to adopt the cool, measured tone I must assume in order to maintain my place as a Reasonable Woman in this “conversation” one more time, I fear I will rip my tongue out of my throat. So in the hopes of moving this conversation along, I’ve compiled of list of things not to say when women complain of sexual harassment in philosophy, and a brief explanation of what is wrong with them. This list is just a compilation of bits of conversations I’ve had recently that rankle me the most. Please feel free to edit them, and add your own.

34 things NOT to say in response to complaints about sexual harassment in philosophy:

(Note: ALL of these have been said to me, at some time or another, in conversations about accusations of wrongdoing by fellow philosophers. I’m sure other women have others.)

1. But here is some other couple (both members in the profession, who got together when one was a faculty member/held a more senior position to the other) who are happily married.
2. But he’s fun/just having fun.
3. But he’s cool.
4. But he’s married/has a girlfriend.
5. He’s harmless.
6. He never does that to me.
7. He’s really nice to me.
8. I was hit on/propositioned once at a conference/ talk.
9. I was hit on/propositioned once at a conference/ talk, and it wasn’t so bad/I enjoyed it.
10. But what’s wrong with meeting someone at a conference whom you find attractive and with whom you have similar interests?
11. What’s wrong with asking someone out/two members of a profession having a relationship with each other?
12. But how is a guy supposed to get a date?
13. I’ve never seen him do that.
14. But he’s a good philosopher.
15. But he’s a good force in the department/field.
16. But she’s not a very good philosopher.
17. She’s crazy.
18. The other women who’ve complained about him are crazy.
19. All the women who’ve complained about him are crazy.
20. Pursuing this complaint would ruin his career.
21. But think of all the good he does.
22. What did she expect would happen?
23. But he had a reputation for this kind of thing/everyone knows he’s a sleaze. (!!!)
24. She was asking for it.
25. She’s had other affairs with members of the profession.
26. She’s slept with everyone in the profession.
27. She consented.
28. She’s an adult.
29. It was an adult consensual relationship.
30. Yes I agree he’s a problem but what am I (we) supposed to do about it?
31. But then you owe me a solution to the problem/an answer to the question of what we should do about this.
32. What do you want them (us) to do, fire him?
33. Just ignore it.
34. Just ignore it and focus on your work.

Why are these wrong?

Complaints of harassment are complaints of lack of professionalism in ways that hinder women’s professional advancement in philosophy. They include complaints that men are sexually predatory, aggressive, hostile, that they abuse their position, that they alternately prey on women sexually or spurn them for perceived rejection, that they systematically exclude women from philosophical conversations, downgrade their contributions, ignore them or respond to them with overly hostile reactions. Men in the field often take out their personal and professional frustrations on their female colleagues with sexual aggression. They do so overtly, by making overt sexual advances towards women that bear no relation to meaningful attempts to enter into a mutually respectful and caring relationship, and have everything to do with reasserting their feelings of power and control in personal and professional contexts. Or they might do so less overtly, with ad hominem attacks on women’s femininity or sexuality and attractiveness, or their quality as a philosopher, made either directly or behind women’s backs to other members of the profession. These are also ways of reasserting their power and bruised masculinity and enlisting other members of the profession in their diminishment of their female colleagues

CFP: 12th Annual University of Miami Graduate Student Conference

Call For Papers

12th Annual University of Miami Graduate Student Conference

Date: October 16th-18th 2014
Place: Miami, Florida

Keynote Addresses: John Arras, Rebecca Kukla (topics: TBA)

Submission Deadline: September 1st 2014

The Department of Philosophy at the University of Miami invites submissions for its annual graduate student conference. This year, we are interested in papers directly related to the ethical or epistemological issues arising in the field of medicine (or an intersection of such issues); e.g., issues related to clinical trials, public health policy, human enhancement, etc. Papers responding to Dr. Arras’ or Dr. Kukla’s work are especially encouraged. However, if you think you can make a positive contribution to the conference, papers dealing with philosophical issues in medicine more broadly construed are also welcomed.

Submission Guidelines:

1. Papers should be no more than 3000 words, or 30 minutes reading time.
2. Papers should be prepared for blind review (no identifying information), and accompanied by a title page including:
a) Author’s name
b) Academic status and affiliation
c) Contact information (e-mail address preferably)
d) 150 word abstract
3. Send electronic copies in .doc or .pdf format to or send two paper copies to:
Lance Aschliman
UM Philosophy Department
PO Box 248054
Coral Gables, FL 33124-4670, USA

For more information, email For information on previous conferences, visit (This link seems broken as of the time of posting.)

Conference – Emergencies and affected peoples: philosophy, policy and practice

The University of Birmingham is hosting, “Emergencies and affected peoples: philosophy, policy and practice” on Friday 4th July 2014 (09:00-17:30).

Keynote delivered by Professor David Alexander (UCL)

Enrico Quarantelli is considered the founder of the social science of disasters. His research offers that “a disaster is primarily a social phenomenon and is thus identifiable in social terms” (Quarantelli & Dynes, 1977, p. 24). The recognition that disasters are social incidents – as well as physical and political ones – is important to our understanding of what really happens in a disaster. A thorough understanding of the social component in disasters also helps us understand what needs to be done to bring society to a post-emergency normality.

Emergencies and Affected People: Philosophy, Policy and Practice aims to investigate this relationship in order that we might inform policy and better support casualties of disaster. With a cross-discipline, cross-emergency-type concentration on those affected, discussants in this conference will investigate various societal realities and their connection with our experiences in emergency situations. Each panel has one academic and one practitioner; the panels were organized in this way in order to stimulate debate and balance theoretical and practical perspectives.

There is a common theme, though, across the four panels: all social scientists – whether academics or practitioners – aim to inform debates around and improve how we help those impacted by an emergency. Our goal today is therefore to raise awareness of the societal issues that occur during a disaster and contribute to the debate about how best to help those affected.

To register for the conference, please email with your name and affiliation. The conference is free to attend but registration is required as space is limited.