Sept. 10, 2007

Philosophy and Sexism

Sally Haslanger’s latest paper won’t appear until next year, in the journal Hypatia, but a version she posted online is attracting considerable attention by pointing out the limits of progress for women in philosophy.

Looking for a job?

See all 272 new postings

Browse all job listings:

Faculty: 2,719
Administrative: 2,095
Executive: 157
FEATURED EMPLOYERS

Haslanger studied the gender breakdowns in the top 20 departments (based on The Philosophical Gourmet Report) and found that the percentage of women in tenure track positions was 18.7 percent, with two departments under 10 percent. She also looked at who published in top philosophy journals for the last five years and found that only 12.36 percent of articles were by women. Figures like that might not shock in some disciplines, but they stand out in the humanities. In history, for examples, a 2005 report found women making up 18 percent of full professors and 39 percent of assistant professors.

A full professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Haslanger acknowledges in the paper that she and others have achieved success, and she praises MIT (which in the past has studied its treatment of women in the sciences) for its equitable environment. But Haslanger recounts numerous examples in her paper of “blatant discrimination” that she has encountered, as deans from various colleges call to ask about tenure recommendations they have received, as professors have shared stories with her, and that she personally experienced as she rose through the philosophy ranks at several highly regarded departments.

“I’ve witnessed plenty of occasions when a woman’s status in graduate school was questioned because she was married, or had a child (or took time off to have a child so she was returning to philosophy as a ‘mature’ student), or was in a long distance relationship,” she writes. “For some reason, this never seems to be an issue with men.”

Many graduate programs have few women as students, suggesting the problem could get worse. Haslanger writes that when she taught at the University of Michigan in the 1990s, three consecutive cohorts of grad students had no women. Haslanger earned her Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley in 1985. Because she was the only woman in her class, and the only women in the classes two years ahead and behind her dropped out, she ended up as the only woman in five years of cohorts.

“I was the butt of jokes when I received a distinction on my prelims, since it seemed funny to everyone to suggest that I should get a blood test to determine if I was really a woman. In a seminar in philosophical logic, I was asked to give a presentation on a historical figure when none of the other (male) students were, later to learn that this was because the professor assumed I’d be writing a thesis on the history of philosophy,” she writes.

To judge from comments posted about her essay on Crooked Timber and other blogs, many women in graduate school today remain the only women in their programs — and experience variations on what Haslanger described.

In her essay, Haslanger also discusses other issues, such as a general skepticism about feminist approaches to philosophy and an ingrained — and sometimes unknowing — bias of many professors. She also writes that the discipline is losing women to related fields, especially cognitive sciences, where women feel more welcome. “Most women and minorities who are sufficiently qualified to get into grad school have choices,” she writes. “They don’t have to put up with this mistreatment.”

And the treatment extends to professors like Haslanger. She recently published an article in Noûs, a top philosophy journal, that dealt in part with issues of gender and race. A male philosopher sent the journal an e-mail, copying Haslanger, that said “why are you publishing this kind of junk?” and going on to make “demeaning and belittling comments.”

Does philosophy have a gender problem that is worse than other disciplines?

Among those who think so is David Schrader, executive director of the American Philosophical Association. While he said he didn’t want to overgeneralize, he said that “clearly we have some significant enclaves of chauvinism.” The association is currently planning to collect data on women and employment in the discipline.

“I suspect philosophy is in many respects different from other humanities,” he said. “Obviously none of this should justify sexism in any sense. But the culture of philosophy is halfway between the culture of humanities and the culture of mathematics.” He also said that there “are quarters in the profession where feminist philosophy is not highly regarded.”

He said that while analytic feminism and feminist philosophy of science are well respected, many philosophers are skeptical of postmodern feminism. Journals like Hypatia that publish important feminist work are not always considered important in tenure decisions, he said.

Miriam Solomon, a professor of philosophy at Temple University who has served on the philosophy association’s committee on the status of women, said Haslanger’s article was on target and important. In part, it is the discipline that creates the tension, she said. Abstraction and formalism, which are major approaches to the field, “are associated with masculine forms of thinking.” Then, she said, because women have not reached a critical mass, sexist remarks are made and go unchallenged — in ways that would not be socially acceptable in other fields.

She also said that all feminist work seems to be questioned. As to Schrader’s distinction between analytic and postmodern feminist thought, she said that “a lot of feminists would say ‘I’m neither analytic nor postmodern.’ “

Haslanger considers her work very much in the analytic model, but noted that hasn’t stopped her from experiencing sexism. She said that one theory she has is that so much emphasis is placed on argument in the field that there is a culture that rewards the belittling of others, especially women. This may make philosophy more difficult than many other disciplines for women — at least as long as there are many sexists around, she said.

“In science, you have the data. In literature you have the text. In history, you have archives, and in mathematics you have the proof. In all of these areas, you have some external basis,” she said “In philosophy of science and history of philosophy, women tend to do better because you can show the text and prove your interlocutor wrong. In metaphysics and epistemology, there is nothing except the argument, and a lot of it comes down to the bravado of the person.”

While Haslanger hasn’t made formal proposals for reform, in her essay and in the interview, she spoke of the importance of ensuring that women receive equal treatment through blind review of journal submissions and that “efforts ought to be made to make sure women aren’t solo in graduate programs.”

Commentary online about Haslanger’s piece has generally been positive (she said in the interview that she had been expecting a backlash), although there have been some disagreements about what to do about the situation. In the Crooked Timber discussion, some worried about different standards that might be used by graduate departments to admit more women. In a posting on the philosophy blog Thoughts, Arguments and Rants, Brian Weatherson, a philosopher at Cornell University, praised Haslanger for raising the issues, but said he wasn’t sure about blind reviewing. He wrote that he thinks non-anonymous review journals have been doing a better job at publishing women than those with blind reviews.

“I suspect unconscious discrimination is more of an issue at this time than conscious discrimination,” Weatherson writes. “I mean, I can’t imagine thinking ‘I’m not going to publish this because it’s by a woman.’ But I can imagine thinking ‘I’m not going to publish this because it doesn’t have features X, Y or Z that I regard as key virtues of a philosophy paper,’ where, in practice, virtues X, Y or Z are virtues that are more commonly found in papers written by men than by women.”

Weatherson also noted — as did Haslanger — that good data do not exist on submission rates of women to these journals. (Several journal editors declined to comment or did not respond to messages seeking their views.)

Haslanger said that while she doesn’t have a precise plan of action, it was important “to hold journals and departments accountable” for their decisions, and to encourage more discussion. Two tables from her study follow. As for discussion, it appears that she has succeeded.

Percentage of Female Authors in Leading Philosophy Journals, 2002-7

Journal	Female Authors
Ethics	19.3%
Journal of Philosophy	13.3%
Mind	6.4%
Noûs	11.6%
Philosophical Review	11.1%
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research	12.3%
Philosophy and Public Affairs	14.0%
Total	12.4%

Percentage of Tenured and Tenure-Track Positions Held by Women in Top Philosophy Departments, 2006

1.	New York U.	11%
2.	Rutgers U.	13%
3.	Princeton U.	19%
4.	U. of Michigan	4%
5.	U. of Pittsburgh	15%
6.	Stanford U.	25%
7.	Harvard U.	25%
8.	Massachusetts Institute of Technology	18%
9.	U. of California at Los Angeles	17%
10.	Columbia U.	36%
11.	U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill	13%
12.	U. of California at Berkeley	18%
13.	U. of Arizona	28%
14.	U. of Notre Dame	12%
15.	U. of Texas at Austin	7%
16.	Brown U.	23%
17.	Cornell U.	21%
18.	U. of Southern California	15%
19.	Yale U.	35%
20.	U. of California at Irvine	19%

— Scott Jaschik

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

The various “pockets” of philosophy

It is important to clarify for those not familiar with the philosophy disipline in the United States that this is not a homogeneous terrain and that there are pockets of philosophy. The study in question here seems to be dealing with the predominant “analytical philosophy” with an emphasis on metaphysics and philosophy of language. The schools and the journals cited are representative of this dominant, although very reactive, strain of philosophy. In the last twenty years, other “pockets” of philosophy have been flourishing, and have been undermining the hegemony of the analytical strain. The new pockets are much more open to women and to original thinkers who are not worshipping at the altar of logic and of “argumentation” but are involved in questioning traditional apporaches to ethics and politics by situating the epistemological foundations upon which these rely socially and historically. Thus, the old metaphysicians and epistemologists felt even more threatened by the new “vampires” who are not only undermining their fetish with a-historical worldplay but also taking away students from them as new generations started becoming more and more political. This is where the “sexism” need to be analyzed, within these reactive traditions to change and to newcomers. This “conservative backlash” hit women hardest in the traditional departments (still dominant nationwide, especially at the institutions cited above, as well as a few others) due to the prominence of feminist philosophies in the new traditions of the last twenty years (both historians of philosophy and those engaged in what is termed “continental” philosophy) and the inability of old metaphyscians to look beyond essentialist reductivism. So are women doing better elsehwere? Of course, especially in the emerging pockets of philosophy associated with continental social and political philosophy (the most established philosophers in this field are women such as Judith Butler, Elizabeth Grosz, Wendy Brown, just to cite a few). So it is not only women that are discriminated against by the old reactionary philosophers, but also anyone who threatens their definition of “proper philosophy": anyone associated with the history of philosophy (encompassing a very broad field that is no longer limited in time and space but texts of various social-historical intersections) or with continental philosophy (broadly defined as a reassessment of traditional philosophy initially undertaken by 19th and 20th century German and French thought, but that developed into a heterogenous questioning of ontological foundations of ethics and politics) are currently being excluded from the journals and the schools listed above (and numerous others). But this backlash is not working, and will probably not last beyond another decade or so, since most graduate students and new teachers and researchers of philosophy are choosing the social and historical route instead of the path of eternal essences or of linguistic games. So please change the title from “Philosophy and Sexism” to “Analytical Philosophy of Sexism” or even “Old school sexism"—for this kind of sexism transcends disciplinary boundaries and is cultural, historical, and economic in nature.

FK, at 5:45 am EDT on September 10, 2007

No sexism in European philosophy departments?

Given that in Europe the dominant methods of philosophy are not analytic, I’d like to see evidence for the claim the commentator makes. Is the representation of women in prestigious professional philosophy posts better in France, Germany, Austria, Italy, etc? Until we see the numbers, the claim that the problem is caused by an emphahsis on analytic methods is unsupported. It should also be noted that the numbers of women are better in related “analytic” fields such as linguistics, cognitive science, and many natural sciences.

Sally, Professor at MIT, at 7:55 am EDT on September 10, 2007

Schrader’s comments

Excerpt from the article:

While not attempting to deny the existence of sexism in mathematics, I wonder if Prof. Schrader knows anything about mathematics or whether he just feels justified in attacking mathematicians without knowing anything about the field. I don’t know who David Schrader is, but a Google search on his name came up with just one hit on a philosopher, David A. Schrader at Washington and Jefferson College. A look at the via of this individual shows no connection with mathematics or mathematicians.

math prof, at 10:45 am EDT on September 10, 2007

Of women philosophers...

It is my understanding that today women far outnumber men as undergraduates by about 55% to 45%. Given this fact, it seems self-evident that any shortage of women in any of the arts or sciences will, in the very near future, be eradicated. Once again, America will prove that she is the best hope for equality that mankind has.

feudi pandola, at 10:50 am EDT on September 10, 2007

The questions remain...

It remains unclear whether there is discrimination against women who are authors of philosophy articles or against women who are authors of feminist philosophy articles.

Considering that feminism is the largest “conspiracy theory” ever advanced, and considering that feminism goes as far as contradicting science by asserting the existence of “gender” in humans, the negative reaction to feminists articles in philosophy is quite understandable. Perhaps the only solution would be to stop accepting feminist publications and leave it to feminists to establish their own journals. Scientific articles cannot operate with such spurious terms as gender, and philosophy should not be degraded to politics.

It is unfortunate that this news article mentions the MIT “study” of the “treatment of women in the sciences". This “study", published in 1999, was ordered and then approved by Robert Birgeneau (presently — Chancellor of the UC at Berkeley); it found discrimination of women in science and complained that women were not “pampered, overpaid, indulged". Yet, R. Birgeneau had refused to present scientific evidence for the conclusions of the study to the public, and the scandalous study was called a “political manifesto masquerading as science", “corruption of science", “junk science", etc. Nancy Hopkins, the leader of the “discriminated” professors (and appointed by R. Birgeneau to be the chair of the study) was not only given more money, but was given the membership in the National Academy of Sciences. This “study” remains as a horrific example of never proven “scientific” data.

Understandably, any person who discriminates against women-authors must be removed from the position that allows such discrimination to be carried out. And that needs the proven evidence of wrongdoing, not statistical junk science.

Michael Pyshnov, at 11:05 am EDT on September 10, 2007

The correct Schrader

I mistyped his middle initial—it should be David E. Schrader—but comparing the photos on the Washington and Jefferson and the American Philosophical Association websites, it’s the same person.

math prof, at 11:05 am EDT on September 10, 2007

On the Persistence of the Sexual Contract

I wish to reiterate the importance of Sally Haslanger’s crucial, study. A forthcoming work by two pioneers in the study of sexism and racism in philosophy and Western political thought more broadly is going to further underscore in theoretical terms the argument behind Haslanger’s empirical findings. The text co-authored by Carole Pateman and Charles Mills is entitled CONTRACT AND DOMINATION (Polity Press, available October 2007), and it revisits their respective theses regarding the sexual contract and the racial contract. I would also urge readers to visit the website for an organization co-coordinated by Haslander called: Symposium on Gender, Race, and Philosophy: https://wikis.mit.edu/confluence/display/SGRP/SGRP+Home. It should be clear from the articles and theorists contributing to the symposia that the areas of analytic and continental philosophy are represented, and the issue of sexism in philosophy (and the academy at large) is one that is not attributable to a single sub-field. Much work needs to be done, but this critical conversation on philosophy, sexism, and racism is thankfully underway.

Agent of Aufhebung, at 11:35 am EDT on September 10, 2007

Why women play low-risk strategies

There are so many, many double binds for women in the profession. Ironically, even feminism creates a double bind. Women are pushed into “doing feminism.” When I was untenured a senior colleague told me that I could “strengthen my chances for tenure” if I would “get into feminism” and reported that another unnamed colleague had remarked “she was hired as a woman—she should be doing feminism.” When women take the bait, they’re assessed as second rate because feminism is regarded as a peripheral, “soft” area.

We shoot ourselves in the feet with no prompting too. The paragraph that jumped out at me in Haslinger’s article concerned the tendency of women in the profession to adopt “low-risk strategies.” I did that—by “getting into feminism” as suggested and in a variety of other ways. It isn’t a matter of “internalizing” negative assessments of one’s abilities but simply recognizing how tough things are in the profession for everyone, and for women especially. The job market is horrendous and there are no fall-back positions and few options outside of academia, particularly for women.

As far as I could see, my options outside of Academia were strictly secretarial. When I was untenured and vulnerable men with “worthless humanities degrees” could get half decent jobs in the real world and access informal career ladders but women couldn’t. We had an exploited adjunct who decided to take some time off to test the waters Outside. He got a low-leval clerical job. After a few weeks, Management was walking by and saw him xeroxing. Management asked him whether he wasn’t bored xeroxing, got into a conversation with him, discovered he had an MA in philosophy and kicked him upstairs into a management trainee position. He never came back. You can bet that if Management had seen me xeroxing he wouldn’t have paid any attention of wondered whether I was bored—just another secretary xeroxing. I wouldn’t have gotten the chance that adjunct did.

So even apart from discrimination, women in the profession are in a very different position from men. You look around and see that just statistically the odds of getting tenured are lower than they are for men, and the odds of making it big are even lower. You know that without special credentials—without even a degree in business—your chances outside of Academia are much worse than your male counterparts’. At the same time you’re encouraged to adopt low-risk strategies—"do feminism,” get into applied ethics and make a niche for yourself in the sorts of specialty areas deemed especially appropriate for “women and minorities,” concentrate on teaching. So because women are differently situated in terms of risks and incentives, women in the profession, as rational choosers, make different decisions.

My aim was to get tenure at all costs. Period. I played the low-risk strategy because I was scared out of my wits. Lots of women play this strategy for the same reasons—because the costs and risks are different for women—and then male colleagues conclude that we aren’t ambitious, aren’t interested in working in hard areas and are more interested in teaching than research. So the game perpetuates itself.

H. E. Baber, at 11:35 am EDT on September 10, 2007

About those current plans...

I admit to chuckling (somewhat sympathetically) when I read the sentence, “The association is currently planning to collect data on women and employment in the discipline.” Isn’t it always?

As a member of the APA who contributed a report to its committee on women’s status, I did due diligence as to the efforts of the APA to collect data on women in the profession; past efforts got poor response, and were part of a less than ideally designed study. I had better luck working with the Bureau of Labor Statistics to find payroll data. Colleagues in other fields who’ve heard me talk about my data collection efforts are astounded that our association has no current figures, nor even a rough consensus.

Glad to see Prof.Baber’s identification of the bind women are in who are expected to teach appropriately marginalized subjects like feminism whether they wish to or not; on the other end of that double-bind, those of us who love teaching it often find ourselves in the position of playing down our interest in our specialty, precisely because it’s marginalized.

KJNorlock, Professor at St. Mary’s College of MD, at 1:25 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

LOW RISK CAN BE GOOD

“My aim was to get tenure at all costs. Period. I played the low-risk strategy because I was scared out of my wits.”

Presumably, you accomplished your aim. Perhaps I’m mistaken, but I get the sense that you’re still not quite happy with the result. As someone who spent a long time in the business world, (which you seemed to think only offered you secretarial options) we tend to be puzzled by people who identify a goal, choose an appropriate strategy for achieving it, attain the goal, and then appear unsatisfied.

In my personal investing, I choose almost crazily low levels of risk. And you know what? I rarely generate returns comparable to people who take more risk. I just don’t see what the larger problem with that is. It only reflects my personal preference, not some systemic failure.

chris b, at 2:05 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

I’m glad to see comments questioning the way this article seems to conflate two different subjects: Women who study philosophy and feminist philosophy. It saddens me to see that any scholar would voluntarily “ghetto-ize” herself in the hope of achieving tenure. It is also unfair to any white male who might be interested in gender or race issues: Are we to assume that his findings would be by definition inauthentic? This brings to mind the articles — here and elsewhere — that assume that family friendly employment practices are a “women’s issue.” Don’t men have children? Aren’t women interested in other questions than those of gender? I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.

NM mom, at 2:45 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Women in Philosophy

I found it at a very high importance level that women philosophers be as equal as men. Especially in the highly educated and advanced state our world has proven its self to be. I couldn’t believe when I read how Haslanger had actually witnessed a woman in graduate school be questioned on her status because she had a child, and therefor took off time. Of course this never would affect a man, and never seems to be an issue. How could men not appreciate the fact that a women has the guts and mental strength to tackle the feat of being faced with a daily routeen of men men and more men. Haslanger states, :I was the butt of jokes.” It’s sad to think she went through school and was treated so much differently not because she was the minority but becaus she was the only female in there. Overall i really liked reading the article and thought it had a great view and real life explantion to philosophy and the women in it.

Mallory McCoy, Chico State Student, at 5:00 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Enough with the generalizations!

First, in response to Sally, you cannot lump together philosophy in Italy, Germany, France, etc. Every social and historical context is different from the other. This is something analytical philosophers do not want to acknowledge. But if you consider France, for example, go check for yourself: The number of women who are directors of fields of study in the CNRS (Centre National de Recherche Scientifique) is very impressive and so are the number of well established women philosophers—although they are not equal by any means to the number of men—(e.g., Cixous, Irigaray, Kristeva, de Romilly, Stenghers, etc.). The point is that the actual conditions of the discipline itself need to be addressed within the context of specific cultural, social, economic, and political forces instead of generalizing based on specific data: contexts and forces are materially relevant and should be considered along with the determinate elements considered to be “factuals.”

Second, in response to those who are complaining about “feminism” (but also those that had to comply with the essentialist projections of the male-dominated gaze), I wanted to distinguish between the popular (and condescending) understanding of feminism and what it may mean as a philosophical orientation. Philosophical Feminism is a movement that reassesses our dominant epistemologies and uncovers controlling mechanisms that perpetuate assymetries of power not only at the level of gender differences, but in relation to various “othering” processes. Those who believe that feminism is a bunch of “ladies” claiming their rights to earn as much as men, or to be treated fairly, are not taking seriously the fundamental questions raised by feminist philosophies.

Please pick up a book, or take a class, and start learning before you go teaching your students the empty generalizations depicted here. And while I think the study that is in question here is worthwhile, we do need to dissect its general presuppositions and improve on it by making it as situation-specific as possible.

FK, at 5:25 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Tenure for Women faculty

I am in an Economics department where there are no tenured women faculty and no one on tenure track too. The last female faculty that went for tenure did not get it. The last male faculty that got tenure had fewer publications than her. The three women faculty in my department hold non tenure track positions. I have been in this institution for over 10 years. I think that my department will be an excellent case to study the status of women in academia... Well, I guess there are plenty such departments out there. It is sad but the fact is that the status of women in academia has remained the same in the last decade.

Ethnic minority woman, at 6:30 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Schrader’s bona fides

I can’t say whether mathematics departments have a sexism problem. I can say that David Schrader is not blindly “attacking” mathematicians. I know David, and know that he is actually quite familiar with and respectful of mathematics in particular and the sciences more generally. But disregarding my unverifiable personal knowledge of David, his claim that the culture of philosophy resembles that of mathematics, and that this might be part of the explanation of (not excuse for) the gender gap in philosophy is simply NOT an attack upon mathematicians. It is a claim about the culture of two disciplines, a claim that is echoed in Haslanger’s own observations. If you disagree, say so and give your reasons, but it was not an attack on you or your colleagues.

I’m always amazed at the defensiveness aroused by any discussion of sexism.

Will, McGill, at 8:30 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Pipeline fallacy

It is wrong to suppose with feudi pandola and others that women will soon reach parity amongst professors because they are a majority of undergraduates.

Women have been a clear majority of undergraduates in many subjects for decades — easily long enough for any supposed pipeline to reach graduate school and the professoriate. Yet women continue to be under-represented in the professoriate in these subjects.

Gavin, Principal Policy Adviser at Griffith University, Australia, at 8:30 pm EDT on September 10, 2007

Women going into graduate school

I find it interesting that although Haslinger’s paper discusses that part of the problem is a lack of critical mass of women in grad school, very little research has been done to discuss how women do when applying to grad school (in terms of how often they are accepted, into which programs, with how much funding, and so on).

I applied to Ph.D. programs two years ago, and didn’t get in anywhere. There were a lot of reasons for this, and I am certain I will be more successful this year. But I can’t help but wonder if my writing sample having to do with feminism and aspects of my statement of purpose somehow not being “hard-hitting” enough did me in.

I don’t even know what my desiderata are, exactly. Is it survival strategies, so I can get into a program, get a job, get tenure, and then begin to breathe my own air? Even at the cost of strongly selling out? I think that’s the reason the other poster said that she choose a road to get tenured, and yet still has a bad taste in your mouth. You got what you wanted, but on terms that were distasteful.

Nurelle, at 4:00 am EDT on September 11, 2007

I’m not sure who FK was talking about as having a condescending view of philosophical feminism — or more properly feminist philosophy — but my point was not to criticize feminism as a specialty. I just think scholars of any race or gender should be encouraged to pursue whichever specialty interests them personally, whether it be continental thought, analytical theories, symbolic logic or gender studies.

NM mom, at 4:00 am EDT on September 11, 2007

My position on this article is that women philosophers and women in general should be on the same equality level of men. Women shouldn’t be seen as lower individuals than men at any point in their lives. Neither should their work be questioned due to their gender. Sexism is the discrimination or devaluation based on a person’s sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially discriminant against women. There is no surprise that this still goes on today and probably will never end. “Many graduate programs have few women as students, suggesting the problem could get worse.” Haslanger writes that when she taught at the University of Michigan in the 1990s, three consecutive cohorts of grad students had no women. Haslanger was the only woman in her class and ended up being the only women in five years of cohorts due to others dropping out. I just want to say that being a young women myself, it is sad to see my gender looked upon as more incompetent than men and ultimately inferior. I am sure it makes some women think that they won’t be able to succeed as far in life as men will.

Ho’onani Dennis, Philisophy and Sexism at CSU, Chico student, at 4:00 am EDT on September 11, 2007

Discrimination and “choice”

chris b. has clearly missed the point of the female professor whose goal was tenure at all costs. What is puzzling about a woman who is left with a bitter taste in her mouth after identifying her goal and realizing that she could not puruse it on a strategy of her own choosing made the “choice” to adopt another strategy that would make sense to discriminatory people in her institution?

Yes, she got the tenure she wanted but she got it on someone else’s terms. This is one of the points Haslanger’s study makes apparent. If a woman is in a philosophy department that is not supportive of women doing “traditional” philosophy, they may shuttle them into feminist philosophy or other areas of philosophy (disregarding their personal preference) that they think are more suitable.

You comparing her situation with your experience of low-level investing in the business world is shallow. If you don’t take “high-level risks” you don’t “generate returns"?! You seem to not realize that this woman’s career and livelihood were at stake. Do not fault her for choosing not to “take more risk” and do not chide her for being unhappy about being discriminated against.

DM, at 1:05 pm EDT on September 11, 2007

emotions vs facts

It is my understanding that women limitations have decrease dramatically in past years. Although I see were your accusation of sexism is coming from I found the report to be full of emotions instead of clear facts. The facts in the report are well classify only showing one side of the spectrum. It is important to understand that the process of equality in the United States is and will be a constant and never ending fight. This fight is being going for years and will continue to exist as long as diversity exist. There is some interesting facts about female progress in the nation in this website you can fallow this link if you are interested. http://insidehighered.com/content/edit/178285/1

daniel cerruto jacobs, csu chico, at 6:25 pm EDT on September 11, 2007

That old sawhorse

I may be wasting breath (or the virtual equivalent), but I have to respond to the last comment about Sally presenting emotions, not clear facts. That is one of the oldest and easiest ways of dismissing anything a woman (or a member of various minority groups) has to say. Leaving aside the questionable nature of the distinction, grant that emotions terms are employed: rage, for example. But are anecdotes not “facts"? How are the three appendices presented in cold, hard numbers non-factual?

I get so sick of hearing this trite dismissal. And then, since I am irritated, my objections can easily be discounted as “emotional". :)

L, at 3:45 am EDT on September 12, 2007

Everyone thinks they are the exception

One thing that has fascinated me throughout my graduate and tenure track experience is the way in which every department (and this can perhaps be extended to many of the individuals within those departments) believes they are the ‘exception.’ “It is those OTHER people who are sexist (or racist). We are doing our best! Really!” And, whatever does happen is always seen as some kind of accident. If grad students or junior faculty of color or women leave in droves or fail to progress, this is never, ever caused by sexism or racism.

It is very strange. Almost everyone will admit to the existence of sexism and racism and some will be very concerned about it but so few will believe that they are subject to its effects.

They don’t seem to know that you can’t just see sexism or racism by taking a look around you. Invariably, they take a look around and decide either (a) everything is just fine because Jane Smith got a job at Princeton last year! or (b) even if everything is not fine, a few little tweaks here or there and everything will be fine.

I take that back, a bit. In philosophy, there are a surprising number of people who don’t seem to believe sexism or racism exists or who honestly do not care. Far more people seem outraged that talented white males cannot get good jobs these days than are outraged by racial or gender inequality.

Right now, there is some guy reading this article thinking “Sigh. Here they go again. What IS the problem?” Beat. “I’m sure there is no problem.”

Another slightly funny fact: The more a powerful person sees himself or herself as committed to gender or racial equality, the more they tend to be deeply hurt by any concern raised about sexism or racism in their own vicinity. So grad students and junior faculty who are experiencing sexism or racism may still have to remain silent even if they are lucky enough to find a senior person who is aware of these issues.

I’m reluctant to list some illustrations of these claims. Philosophy is a very small world.

I’ve started to wonder whether there is some kind of point beyond which you can’t affect institutionalized racism or sexism by trying to persuade people to change. Philosophy is a very long way from this point, of course. Most people in philosophy honestly don’t care. But even when they do care (or claim to) it is amazing the extend to which they remain blind to it.

Anonymous, Assistant Prof., at 2:25 pm EDT on September 12, 2007

I am a studnet in a philosophy class and my teacher is a feminist philosopher. She told the class that she would get picked on because she was also the only girl in her class. Being in a class with all girls it is hard to imagine this but apparently it happens. I din’t realize that it occurs frequently. This was a very good article and opened my eyes a bit on sexism and how women are treated.

Rebecca, at 9:50 pm EDT on September 12, 2007

I have to give props to Haslanger for not only being the only woman in her class, but the only woman in five years of cohorts. It is amazing that she did not give in and quit like the rest of the women. It must have been very difficult to overcome all of the discrimination thrown at her, but in the end, she came out on top as a stronger individual.

Amy, at 6:05 am EDT on September 14, 2007

I think that by her standing up and not giving up like the other women shows how special she was.

kacie, at 1:00 pm EDT on September 14, 2007

Although I don’t dispute the unconscious sexism towards women in the field of philosophy, I think part of the reason is just due to the low numbers of women who are interested in the subject. Coming into undergraduate school, philosophy wasn’t a well advertised field. Plus, I think a lot of women simply don’t find it an intriguing enough topic to basetheir career on, at least not yet. Ten years ago, there were practically no women majoring in civil engineering. However today, engineering is becoming less and less male dominated. I think with time, like everything else, philosophy will become more equal for the sexes.

Julie, at 6:38 pm EDT on September 14, 2007

Women In Philosophy

While reading this article, I found the fact that while she was the only women in her courses, that she was looked upon or questioned of her intelligence just because they didn’t see that she should be in that particular course. But to have the audacity to give an assignment ownly to one person regarding their gender, I found to be extremely degrading. There are still today where there is gender discrimination because there are always the questions of are women smarter than men, or are men stronger than women, but should the question be; why can’t we all be equal? That should be the question that is brought up or viewed daily. I also found the statement by Haslanger about how everyone questioned her as a women, and to suggest a blood test. The one part that I extremely enjoyed was how women are looked down upon when they are in graduate school if they are married, have children, or left and came back after having children; but this does not mean women are incapable of succeeding. Shouldn’t we applaud those women who have been married, with children, and still furthering their education? I found it greatly important that a women can endure so much whether having had a child, or trying to get through a course with only men, it shows the strengths and endurance of how hard they are willing to work to show that women are just as equal as men.

S. Cervantes, Philosophy and Sexism at CSU, Chico, at 4:45 am EDT on September 18, 2007

A Witness of Sexism in the Youth Generation

After reading this article and reflecting back on events in high school, there were times when I have seen this unfair judgement, not just between two of my peers of the opposite gender, but even between a teacher and a student. A few girls of my high school wanted to compete in a sport that boys would play, football. But coaches strongly discouraged them not to try-out. I was in favor of the idea and urged them to try. i encouraged them not because they were my friends, but because they could make a difference. Unfortunately, this wish would not come true. It’s tragic to see that there is still unequals, even in a land of the free.

Kyle S., at 9:35 pm EDT on September 18, 2007

Mistreatment towards Grad School

I found this to be very enlightening. I am shocked, especially being a woman who is planning on attending graduate school in a year from now. I had no idea that women were looked upon as inferior to men when it came to graduate school. I look forward to reading more.

Brooke Barnecut, CSU Chicco, at 4:50 am EDT on September 28, 2007

What about the job market?

I recently read Haslanger’s article. She makes a very strong case that something is seriously wrong with the way women are treated in philosophy.

However, without defending the behavior of the old guard, I wonder if the overall situation of women in academic philosophy is a bit more complex. Do women, thanks to affirmative efforts in hiring, get tenure-track jobs in philosophy at a significantly greater rate than men?

I don’t know for sure, but I have three sets of reasons for thinking they do.

First, iIn my graduate program, over an eleven-year period (I don’t know about periods before or after), only two men got tenure-track jobs (I was one of them), while several women got such jobs. Most of the men ended up with lecturerships or nothing, though their credentials were comparable to those of the women.

Second, I’ve participated in several search now, and witnessed unwritten but very real pressure from the administration (at more than one institution) to hire women, to the point that we ended up giving women APA interviews and on-campus interviews out of proportion to their share of the applicant pool.

Finally, I recall (I wish I had a copy) a casual survey from about ten years back which indicated that, in one year at the APA Eastern, women got tenure-track jobs at roughly twice the rate of men.

Now admittedly those three pieces of evidence are not very broadly-based, but I suggest that this should be looked into more carefully to see whether my impression is correct. If it’s not, I’ll concede the point.

However, if my impression IS correct, then the situation of women in academic philosophy may be a peculiar combination of significantly greater job opportunities than men coupled with sexist treatment once they get those jobs. Having better job opportunities does not justify the discrimination, of course, but we should look at the whole picture when we discuss some part of that picture.

JD, Asst. Prof., Philosophy, at 5:05 pm EDT on October 14, 2007

Some Belgian anecdotes

I was struck by the paper of Professor Haslanger, especially by her description of the “struck dumb” “feeling". Let me share some of my “"feelings"” (as women don’t share facts but feelings, don’t we?). Some Belgian anecdotes.

As a student, I noticed that we only had male professors. But it never really bothered me that much. To compensate the lack of female rolemodels, I chose to study a female philosopher: Hannah Arendt. It starts here already. Comments like: “Hannah Arendt is not a real philosopher but a journalist.” “Hannah Arendt is famous only because she is a women.”

Now as a representative for PhD students in the faculty council, I get to see the inside of the ‘old man’s club’ that our faculty really is. For me, in fact, it has been an eye-opener. Now I understand what sexism is.

The gender issue is an old problem at the faculty. In the new policy declaration for the next seven years was written: “Women are capable, they just don’t want to pursue an academic career.” And also: “We are against positive discrimination. Women should have the same capacities as men.”

The same person who wrote the declaration is convinced that he is one of the “good guys” fighting for gender equality. He is very disappointed in his female doctoral students as most of them have chosen non academic careers after their PhD. Thus his conclusion, there is no problem at our faculty. They just don’t want to.

With some female colleagues, we try to change things. However, it seems so hopeless. And the “struck dumb” feeling makes me a “just don’t want to” person as well.

Anonymous, PhD student in Philosophy, at 5:55 am EDT on October 17, 2007

Jobs Related to Philosophy and Sexism

or search for jobs directly.

Adjunct Faculty, Philosophy
Joliet Junior College

Joliet Junior College is located in the Chicagoland area. JJC offers over 100 degree and certificate programs in the arts and ... see job

Part-Time Philosophy Instructor
Central Michigan University

PART-TIME TEMPORARY FACULTY TO TEACH PHILOSOPHY COURSES Central Michigan University seeks qualified part-time temporary ... see job

Associate Professor or Professor — Moral Philosophy and/or Political Philosophy
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Philosophy (Adjunct) Instructor
Hillsborough Community College

Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job

Ethical Theory
Carleton College

The Department of Philosophy invites applications for a full-time tenure-track position in Ethical Theory beginning September ... see job

Open
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Assistant, Associate, Full Professor (tenured/tenure-track), pending funding; beginning July 1, 2009. 2 courses per semester, ... see job

Assistant Professor, Philosophy
Lone Star College System

Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job

Assistant Professor: Humanities — Job ID 914
SUNY — Empire State College

SUNY Empire State College seeks to appoint faculty with the online programs of the Center for Distance Learning. The Center ... see job

Assistant Professor — Moral Philosophy and/or Political Philosophy
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities