Eco-feminist philosopher Karen Warren has been diagnosed with a terminal illness.
In a moving piece in Psychology Today, she writes,
This was the start of my personal journey confronting death. As a philosophy professor for nearly 40 years with an expertise in ethics, I often lectured about euthanasia. So, I am quite aware of arguments for and against various end-of-life options. But I never anticipated that my academic expertise would turn into a lived experience: Every day I watch myself deteriorate from a fatal and excruciatingly painful disease. And every day I do so knowing that I cannot legally choose to end my life before I become immobile. Because in my home state—Minnesota—it is illegal to help someone die.
The crux of the debate about aid-in-dying options centers around medical ethics. Physicians take an oath to help their patients and “do no harm.” Many interpret this oath as requiring that patients be kept alive at all costs. The goal of the medical community is to make us live as long as we possibly can—even when our body would long be gone without medical equipment and our quality of life is next-to-nothing.
See more here.
The Minds Online Conference has a great deal of interest, but the second session addresses quite explicitly topics in feminist literature. A number of us, most notably Sally Haslanger, have been working on figuring out the social nature of the destructive bias and and discriminations so many experience. Bryce Huebner gives a stellar presentation on this topic.
In the same session, Stacey Groguen expands the topic of stereotype threat in a way that clarifies some important issues.
I haven’t yet looked at the rest of the papers, but I do urge readers to have a good look at them.
Christiane Amanpour put Hillary’s pneumonia in perspective:
Exeter, Huddersfield, Liverpool and Winchester will pilot a system this year where the names of applicants are not seen during admissions.
The aim is to stop “potential bias” about students’ race and identity.
Universities Minister Jo Johnson said he backed attempts to “stamp out inequality” in higher education.
The pilot project aims to see if masking the names of applicants will remove any “unconscious bias”.
This is interesting, but UK university admissions in so many places is just matter of A-level scores that I’m dubious how much difference this will make.
from the Guardian:
Police forces across England and Wales are considering expanding their definition of hate crime to include misogyny after an experiment in one city that saw more than 20 investigations launched in two months.
The initial success of Nottingham’s crackdown against sexist abuse has drawn national interest after the city’s police revealed that they investigated a case of misogyny every three days during July and August, the first months to see specially trained officers targeting behaviour ranging from street harassment to unwanted physical approaches.
Several other forces have confirmed they are sending representatives to Nottingham this month to discuss the introduction of misogyny as a hate crime.
Police and campaigners said the initial figures were broadly in line with other categories of hate crime such as Islamophobia and antisemitism but were likely to rise significantly as awareness increased.
They are not thinking of banning ‘wolf whistles’. Rather, the crimes involve physical contact or very aggressive bullying.
Really super-thoughtful and interesting.
I wouldn’t expect the world to give me grasshopper trigger warnings. How could I? But if something like 1 in 5 or 1 in 3 students also had a grasshopper phobia, it would be a whole lot more reasonable to expect others to know this and take it into account. It takes work to build a classroom—or a society—where everyone can participate meaningfully. Part of that work is taking into account your students’ life experiences, to the extent that you can know what they are. Whenever I meet someone new and expect that we might be in a situation together where we’ll encounter a grasshopper, I give them a sort of reverse trigger warning. I tell them that I have this phobia, and that I might suddenly start acting weird, running away or suddenly stopping in my tracks. I try to prepare them for my own erratic behavior. We can’t expect this of trauma survivors, but we can work on the assumption that any college classroom contains a few of them. Providing basic trigger warnings about sexual assault, given that knowledge, is the minimally decent thing to do in creating an environment where everyone can succeed.
Read the whole thing.
There’s a video of a debate about prostitution up at The Institute of Art and Idea’s website: “Victims and Conquerors”. (I haven’t watched it myself.)
From the site:
Camille Paglia famously claimed “the prostitute is not the victim of men but rather their conqueror”. Is the demeaning of prostitution strangely part of the patriarchy? Is it time to revere the prostitute as an outlaw who controls sexual contact? Or would this demean us all?
Niki Adams of the English Collective of Prostitutes joins commentator and author of Life at the Bottom Theodore Darlymple, and Catherine Hakim to examine one of society’s last taboos.
Some of the site’s other debates may also be of interest:
“Rethinking Feminism: Is there a universal goal for women’s rights?”
“In Place of Prejudice: Can rationality provide a basis for morality?”