Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Kudos to Rutgers Women Grad Students!

I've not yet had the time to wade through all the relevant material and commentary concerning the prima facie useless, irresponsible, and pernicious "pluralist guide to philosophy," but I'll try to make time to do so in the coming days. Depending on how much I can stomach, I might even post about it.

But in the meantime, I wanted to express deep appreciation for the women graduate students at Rutgers who saw fit to write this excellent open letter.

21 comments:

Euthyphronics said...

Amen!

Anonymous said...

Double amen.

Anonymous said...

Awomen!

Anonymous said...

Now that Rutgers has spoken up and Princeton and NYU have not, we can infer that Princeton and NYU are suffering from dangerous levels of misogyny.

Or, we might not.

/wv: fiestin; what Muslims from the Bronx do during Ramadan.

Anonymous said...

Yes, this is awesome!

Still, perhaps it does not go far enough.

The preposterous and self-serving claims of the 'pluralist guide' folks are not only irresponsible and stupid; they are libellous. Some prospectives will see the idiotic ratings without seeing the excellent response by the female grad students at Rutgers, and without realizing that the 'methods' used by the 'pluralist guide' crowd are anti-empirical, so-called 'feminist', armchair methods that have no rational basis whatsoever. This can do material damage to the reputation of a great department like Rutgers.

So shouldn't the philosophy department at Rutgers at least threaten to sue the writers of the 'pluralist guide' for libel, and follow through if that leads nowhere?

Anonymous said...

Rutgers should threaten to kick their asses.

Anonymous said...

The preposterous and self-serving claims of the 'pluralist guide' folks are not only irresponsible and stupid; they are libellous. Some prospectives will see the idiotic ratings without seeing the excellent response by the female grad students at Rutgers, and without realizing that the 'methods' used by the 'pluralist guide' crowd are anti-empirical, so-called 'feminist', armchair methods that have no rational basis whatsoever. This can do material damage to the reputation of a great department like Rutgers.

I doubt it. If said "prospectives" aren't sharp enough to do a little more research about graduate programs, then I doubt those prospectives would have been competitive applicants in the first place.

This isn't to excuse the cluster-fuck that was the "Climate on Women" rankings (which was itself a perhaps well-intended though poorly executed response to the significantly larger cluster-fuck that is misogyny). But I don't think the damage you implicitly described is where it's at.

Anonymous said...

'cluster fuck' has to be the most crude, tasteless phrase I have heard in a long time.

Anonymous said...

Spiros, you clearly saw this on Leiter's blog, as did I. Which makes me wonder: you must have seen the item just below it on bathroom wall scrawl: "John Fuckin Rawls = Justice." If so, why no comment about it?? It seems like exactly the sort of thing you'd flag, followed by appropriate philosophical questions: the '=' sign. Is it the "is" of predication? the "is" of identity, or is it the "is" of praise, as in "Elvis *is* rock'n'roll" ?

Your silence on this item is conspicuous, and curious. Explain??

Glaucon said...

'cluster fuck' has to be the most crude, tasteless phrase I have heard in a long time.

You need to get out more often...

Anonymous said...

Tasteless language on PA? Thinly veiled attempts at "outing"? What will be next?

I guess me.

wv: pangler: all is fishing, like anon 3:21

Anonymous said...

Not bothering to ask the women in the allegedly offending departments about the climate. . . so much for embodied, contextualized, lived, actual experience! Score another one for disembodied, top-down, a priori, theorizing. It's not just for clueless privileged white guys.

Anonymous said...

That the Rutgers women are so content, even happy, shows only how deep their oppression goes. They've been fully acclimatized to male hegemony, and so now see their subjugation as not only "normal", but healthy. Classic false consciousness.

The pluralist guide rulz!

Boba Fett said...

Is it me or is Leiter trying to put a bounty on your name in his latest post? http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/07/is-high-profile-pseudonymousanonymous-philosophy-blogging-possible.

wv: sweet

That is sweet.

Anonymous said...

@anon 9.32 - Really?

Anonymous said...

Not bothering to ask the women in the allegedly offending departments about the climate. . . so much for embodied, contextualized, lived, actual experience!

My god, thank you!! So true...

In a way, I wish more of these scandals would occur. They invite a certain level of scrutiny to which party-line Continental philosophers aren't often subjected. And I write that as someone who's sympathetic to some Continental philosophy; I just can't stand the bullshit peddled by some of its proponents.

Anonymous said...

From Bryan Magee's fabulous _Confessions of a Philosopher_:

"Despite, or perhaps even helped by, its superficiality, Continental philosophy is making inroads into many university philosophy departments in the English-speaking world, and has taken some over. It has also had an impact on literature departments, and made inroads into departments of psychology, anthropology, sociology and other subjects. In some places a war is going on between counter-balanced factions of Continental and analytic thinkers. Very noticeably, many of the individuals to whom Continental philosophy appeals are among those to whom Marxism once appealed. Its factions often possess the same sort of gang mentality, and behave in the same unlovely ways—in dead jargon rather than living language, portentously rather than simply, obscurely rather than clearly—and to abandon rational argument for rhetoric. It actively trains them not to think, and to be bogus; and in doing these things it debauches their minds."

Anonymous said...

As a female graduate student at one of the “needs improvement” schools, I want to say something I obviously must say anonymously. I am sympathetic towards the view taken in the posts like #7. I disagree with post #1 that ‘the organizers of the Pluralist Guide [should] completely remove the section on the status of women.’

In the past five years, I have had experiences that made me very uncomfortable with the gender climate at each department listed. Some experiences last year at 2 of these departments have convinced me that, unless clear policy and administrative practices are changed along the lines of post #7, then I would not recommend any female at all sensitive to gender issues go to any of these departments. That is, unless the female is one who enjoys uphill battles.

As evidenced by the letter from some Rutgers’ women, the climate there is better than in past years. That said, I see no evidence that this is more than a happy coincidence; and not something that has come about through positive acts of the administrators, chairs, etc.

Anonymous said...

The above numbers refer to the following link's posts.
http://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/open-letter-regarding-climate-guide/#comments

www.encontactos.com said...

Thanks so much for this article, quite effective piece of writing.

formula 1 said...

To my mind one and all must browse on it.