Feminist Philosophers

News feminist philosophers can use

Public Philosophy, On-Line Philosophy, and “What Philosophical Work Could Be” June 11, 2015

Filed under: academia,internet,Journals,publishing — Stacey Goguen @ 5:13 pm

A post from The Splintered Mind 

“Nor need we think that philosophical work must consist of expository argumentation targeted toward disciplinary experts and students in the classroom. This, too, is a narrow and historically recent conception of philosophical work. Popular essays, fictions, aphorisms, dialogues, autobiographical reflections, and personal letters have historically played a central role in philosophy. We could potentially add, too, public performances, movies, video games, political activism, and interactions with the judicial system and governmental agencies.”

“If one approaches popular writing as a means of “dumbing down” pre-existing philosophical ideas for an audience of non-experts whose reactions one does not plan to take seriously, then, yes, that popular writing is not really research. But if the popular essay is itself a locus of philosophical creativity, where philosophical ideas are explored in hopes of discovering new possibilities, advancing (and not just marketing) one’s own thinking, furthering the community’s philosophical dialogue in a way that might strike professional philosophers, too, as interesting rather than merely familiar re-hashing, and if it’s done in a way that is properly intellectually responsive to the work of others, then it is every bit as much “research” as is a standard journal article. Analogously with consulting — and with Twitter feeds, TED videos, and poetry.

“I urge our discipline to conceptualize philosophical work more broadly than we typically do. A Philosophical Review article can be an amazing, awesome thing. Yes! But we should see journal articles of that style, in that type of venue, as only one of many possible forms of important, field-shaping philosophical work.”


When journals don’t follow their own procedures February 4, 2015

Filed under: academia,Journals — jennysaul @ 6:28 pm

Many of us have put a lot of effort into getting journals to use double-anonymous review practices. Even those who don’t think that’s necessary probably do think review by someone who isn’t,say, the author’s supervisor is necessary. Things like this are what make it so important to appreciate the many ways that journals (even top ones) may fall short of even halfway decent practices. This needs to be noticed and paid attention to. So go check out this post at DailyNous, and some of the comments (esp. number 21).


Philosop-Her on Gender and Journals August 26, 2014

Filed under: Affirmative Action,gender,Journals,publishing — phrynefisher @ 6:05 pm

Philosop-Her has opened up another discussion on an important topic: whether quotas could help address gender balance in philosophy journal publishing. (The aim of the post is to start a conversation, rather than to argue for a view about this issue.)

In response to a comment that notes a familiar kind of worry about whether such actions may serve to reinforce prejudice, Meena writes (also in the comments):

Many people argue against affirmative action in the workplace for the reasons that you mention – namely, that it may be stigmatizing. In the end, I’m not sure if this is really the case. Research shows that once people are surrounded by people of colour, for example, and start working with them they start to perceive people of colour differently and more positively. I wonder if something similar wouldn’t apply to the case of seeing more articles by women in top tier journals. Once they are there, we may view the authors and their work more positively.


Hypatia survey results: Where to publish? April 15, 2013

Filed under: Journals,publishing,Uncategorized — KateNorlock @ 1:07 pm

Hypatia editors have sent us an updated version of the survey of alternative venues for publishing originally posted at the Hypatia website here (pdf); since that link isn’t yet updated, we are posting the full updated survey here, as a separate page on our blog with a tab that will remain above until the new Hypatia editors update the old webpage or make a new one.  We will provide an update when the Hypatia website is updated or changed, but in the meantime, enjoy!


Recommended readings for module on distributive justice December 14, 2012

I’m putting together my reading list for next term’s module on distributive justice, and aiming that it NOT be a total sausage fest. I’m finding it surprisingly easy – so many great women political philosophers!

There are two topics I (and perhaps other interested readers?) would really benefit from reading recommendations on:

a) prioritarian principles (either arguing for or being critical of them), and

b) so called left-libertarianism. Any ideas?


CFP: Judgement and Embodiment (Special Issue of PhaenEx) December 13, 2012

Filed under: CFP,Journals — cornsay @ 10:03 am
Tags: , , ,

PhaenEx: journal of existential and phenomenological theory and culture


Call for papers for special edited issue: Judgement and Embodiment
(volume 9.3, to be published in Fall/Winter 2014)


Editors: Alexis Shotwell (Carleton University) and Ada Jaarsma (Mount Royal University)


Feminist judgements about embodiment tend to be normative, identifying and undermining social prescriptions about bodily practices that limit flourishing and intensify oppression; conversely, feminist judgements are also often pragmatic, modeling forms of embodiment that aspire to emancipatory ways of living in the world. Embodiment can be seen, then, as an object of critique as well as a method of transformative critique, and both aspects of embodiment are animated by modes of judgement. Bodily practices that align with feminist resistance may make new capacities of judgement possible: for example, the cultivation of senses that are allergic to prejudicial forms of power and are attuned to non-oppressive relational dynamics. Might we affirm judgement itself as an embodied practice? Such a claim would be somewhat at odds with prevailing liberal scripts about judgement which warn us that judging another’s bodily practices might be impolite or impolitic. Existential and phenomenological approaches to critical theory call such liberal formulations into question, making way for more open-ended and positive conceptions of the intersections of judgement with embodiment.

This special issue will elaborate and explore the problem of embodiment, specifically from the vantage point of feminist concerns about domination and discrimination, on the one hand, and creative and affirmative becoming, on the other. We are especially interested in articles that reflect on particular—or even exemplary—cases that stage the problem of judgement and embodiment.

Deadline:   September 5, 2013

Papers should be prepared for anonymous review, and they can be sent to Alexis Shotwell (Alexis_Shotwell@carleton.ca) or Ada Jaarsma (ajaarsma@mtroyal.ca).


PhaenEx is an electronic journal affiliated with the Canadian based international Society for Existential and Phenomenological Theory and Culture / Théorie et culture existentialistes et phénoménologiques (EPTC/TCEP).

Our intent is to provide an interdisciplinary forum for original research in theory or culture from existential or phenomenological perspectives, broadly construed. This includes but is not restricted to philosophical and critical inquiries related to art, literature, science, technology, popular culture, religion, gender and sexuality, applied moral issues and social relations, as well as the history of continental philosophy itself. Submissions in both French and English are encouraged and all submissions are subject to peer review.

PhaenEx is a bi-annual publication: there is a Spring/Summer Open Issue, and a Fall/Winter Special Topics Issue. For each Open Issue the Editorial Executive welcomes submissions from authors both in and outside EPTC/TCEP. Typically, the Special Topics Issue is derived from a recent EPTC/TCEP panel session. Submissions are not limited to panel participants.

PhaenEx is indexed regularly in the Philosopher’s Index and is registered with the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

The journal’s website is here.


Hypatia suspends new submissions to July 2013 December 2, 2012

Filed under: Journals — KateNorlock @ 1:26 am

From the Hypatia website:

Manuscript submissions have grown dramatically in the last few years, and we’re building up a substantial backlog of accepted article. So, with regret, the editors have decided that we must temporary suspend all new submissions. This does not affect the resubmission of manuscripts accepted with revisions, or Diversity Prize submissions. For the details, please see the full notice here.


Special Issue on Feminist Aesthetics July 16, 2012

Filed under: Journals — KateNorlock @ 2:45 pm

A special issue on Feminist Aesthetics, published by n.paradoxa: international feminist art journal, includes intriguing international contributions. Canadian readers, you might find the interview with Feminist Art Gallery founders Allyson Mitchell and Deirdre Logue of special interest. Although not for profit, access to most of the contents is not free, with the exception of the editorial, an excerpt of which is below:

 What is feminist aesthetics? To some, it arises in a close reading of contemporary women artists’ works with attention to feminist theory. To others, feminist aesthetics represents a model guiding the production of works, exhibition strategies and the presentation of feminist art. While to others again, exploring the relationship between aesthetics and politics becomes a means to re-activate a new set of relationships between art and activism, and through these means produce new forms of feminist politics through their practices. These three key ideas are explored in the close readings of different women artists’ projects in this volume.


APA: Best Practices in Journal Publishing July 8, 2012

Filed under: academia,Journals,publishing — KateNorlock @ 6:11 pm

UPDATED: It was brought to my attention that the Handbook on Placement was similarly unsung and behind a subscription-only firewall.  I’ve added that to the Publications page of the Status of Women site (linked to below).

I’ve posted this on the offsite webpage of the Committee on the Status of Women:

The May 2012 issue of the APA Proceedings ( Vol. 85, No. 5) includes a statement on Best Practices for Journals on pp. 59-63, which we excerpt here [full text linked there] for those who cannot access the Publications available on the Members Only site of APAonline.

This was drafted by many members including those on the Committee on the Status and Future of the Profession, and journal editors such as Thom Brooks and Carol Gould, and includes the following sections:

I Guidelines for Journals

II Guidelines for Authors

III Guidelines for Referees

IV Editorial Practices Related to Copyright and Publication.

Thanks to all those who worked on and deliberated over the Statement!


On Getting a Job (and Publications!) in Philosophy June 7, 2012

Filed under: academia,bias,jobs,Journals,publishing,women in philosophy — Lady Day @ 2:10 pm

A reader (thanks TB!) directs us to a typically lively discussion that occurred over at The Philosophy Smoker at the end of April concerning Carolyn Dicey Jennings’s data on hiring in Philosophy in the past year. Dicey Jennings reports that

…overall prospects are at around 24% chance of getting any job, 17% chance of getting any tenure-track job, 6% chance of getting a ranked tenure-track job.


…one’s overall chance of getting any job (post-doc or tenure-track) coming from an NRC ranked institution may be as high as 51%, 39% for any tenure-track job, and 11% for a ranked tenure-track job.


if you are a woman from an NRC ranked department looking for a ranked job, your chances might be around 9%, whereas if you are looking for a tenure-track job in general they at are around 44%. If you are a woman from an NRC ranked school looking for a post-doc, be advised that only 15% of ranked women achieved post-docs this year (5 out of 34 ranked post-doc achievers), whether or not the post-doc was itself ranked. Because of that fact, the chance of a woman from an NRC ranked department getting a tenure-track job or post-doc is about the same as for a man from these departments: 51%.

The comment thread is worth a look too. The discussion ranges from Dicey Jennings’s methodology to differentials in publishing rates between men and women (as reported by Dicey Jennings). Our reader highlights as especially interesting the following comment:

Anonymous said…
There are a lot of things that can affect publication rates that
aren’t just straightforward discrimination by editors (though 8:24
does target an important problem for women – and, by association, men
– working in certain areas). Feeling encouraged and like one’s ideas
are worth publishing can contribute greatly to publishing rates. It is
often very hard to know oneself whether one’s ideas are worthwhile, or
just “obvious”. I can really only speak from my own point of view on
this, but this means I end up publishing only things that seem really
clearly worthwhile to me (although I’m not a perfect judge of such
things). Which means I pass up on publishing things that are probably
publishable somewhere, which would up my publication rate…but that I
don’t think would make me a better candidate.

As our reader points out, the above comment is especially timely “in light of the one year anniversary of the APA [Mentoring Project] , which was focused on supporting increasing publications.”



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 11,197 other followers