There are few women who play chess, either.
 
This brings up the subject of areas of interest where women  predominate:
What is the common  denominator that explains why , for example,
men are dominant in philosophy  while women clearly outnumber  men
in psychology, neuroscience and English literature.
 
Maybe we should use a subheading for Radical  Centrism:
Neuro-psychological Literary Politics
 
 
That should bring 'em in.
 

Billy 
 
=========================================
 
 
from  the site:
Sociological Images
 
Gender Composition of Academic Disciplines: 
PhDs in 2009
by _Lisa Wade, PhD_ (http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/author/lisa/) ,  
May 5,  2011

 
>From Abi, _Kieran Healy_ 
(http://crookedtimber.org/2011/02/04/gender-divides-in-philosophy-and-other-disciplines/)
 , and the _Survey of Earned 
Doctorates_ (http://www.norc.org/projects/survey+of+earned+doctorates.htm) : 
2009 
data on the  gender divide among doctorate-level graduates in academic 
disciplines (from most  to least female by percentage).   
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
NPR
   
 
(http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2013/06/17/192523112/name-ten-women-in-philosophy-bet-you-can-t#sidebar)
  (http://www.npr.org/) 
 
Name Five Women In Philosophy. 
Bet You Can't.

 
 
 
by Tania Lombrozo

June 17,  2013 1:32 PM 

 
 

 
 
.


Last Friday I found  myself in a lovely lecture hall at Brown University 
with some 50 philosophers  and psychologists attending the annual meeting of 
the _Society for Philosophy and Psychology_ (http://www.socphilpsych.org/) ,  
affectionately known as "SPP." Daniel Dennett was in the seat just ahead of 
me;  additional luminaries were scattered about the room. A quick count 
revealed  about equal numbers of men and women in the audience — an unusual 
figure for an  event in philosophy, where _women make up  less than 20 percent 
of full-time faculty_ 
(http://www.apaonlinecsw.org/workshops-and-summer-institutes) . 
That was precisely the topic we'd gathered to discuss: the  
underrepresentation of women in philosophy, where numbers mirror those for 
math,  
engineering, and the physical sciences, making philosophy an outlier within the 
 
humanities. 
There's been no  shortage of speculation about _why_ 
(http://philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1079) . Perhaps, to quote Hegel,  women's 
"_minds are not adapted 
to  the higher sciences, philosophy, or certain of the arts_ 
(http://philosophypress.co.uk/?p=1079) ." Perhaps women are  turned off by 
philosophy's 
confrontational style. Perhaps women are more  inclined toward careers with 
practical applications. 
But the most plausible  hypothesis is that _various  forms of explicit and 
implicit bias_ (http://biasproject.org/recommended-reading)  operate in 
philosophy, _as  they do within and beyond other academic disciplines_ 
(http://www.amazon.com/Why-Slow-The-Advancement-Women/dp/0262720310/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8
&qid=1371441358&sr=8-1&keywords=why+so+slow) . Unfortunately, though,  this 
explanation refines our question rather than answering it. 
Why should bias be any  greater in philosophy than in other humanistic 
disciplines? Is sexual harassment  unusually common within philosophy, as might 
be suggested by _the  recent scandal involving Colin McGinn_ 
(http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2013/06/colin-mcginn-to-resign-from-the-university-of
-miami.html) , not to mention some chilling  experiences reported in the 
blog _What is it like to be a  woman in philosophy?_ 
(http://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/)  Might our implicit assumptions 
about what a  
philosopher should look like and sound like be especially hard to reconcile 
with  
our implicit assumptions about women? 
Until recently, most of these hypotheses lacked empirical grounding.  
Collecting relevant data is no easy task, and social scientists weren't exactly 
 
lining up for the task. So part of the excitement last Friday — as we waited 
for  a presentation titled "Women and Philosophy: Why is it 'Goodbye' at 
'Hello'?" —  was the promise of data. The speakers were Toni Adleberg and 
Morgan  Thompson, two master's degree students at Georgia State University, 
presenting  preliminary findings from work with Professor Eddy Nahmias. 
Adleberg and Thompson  noted that we don't know exactly why women leave 
philosophy, but thanks  to SPP-supported research by Molly Paxton, Carrie 
Figdor and Valerie Tiberius,  _we have some idea  of when_ 
(http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2012.01306.x) : the biggest drop in the 
proportion of women 
in the  philosophy pipeline seems to be from enrollment in an introductory 
philosophy  class to becoming a philosophy major. At Georgia State, for 
example, women make  up about 55 percent of Introduction to Philosophy students 
but only around 33  percent of philosophy majors. 
To better understand why, Adleberg, Thompson, and Nahmias collected data 
from  over 700 male and female students on their experiences in the 
Introduction to  Philosophy course at their university. The findings were 
revealing, 
as Adleberg  explained: 
 
We expected, of course, to find some gender differences in the survey  
responses. But the extent of those differences was surprising to me. Male and  
female students seem to have quite different experiences in introductory  
philosophy courses.

Overall, female students found the course less enjoyable and the material  
less interesting and relevant to their lives than male students. Compared to 
 male students, they also felt that they had less in common with typical  
philosophy majors or with their instructors, reported feeling less able and  
likely to succeed in philosophy, were less comfortable participating in 
class  discussions and were less inclined to take a second philosophy course or 
to  major in philosophy. (Interestingly, however, they didn't anticipate 
receiving  lower grades.) 
Contrary to some speculation in the field, female students did not perceive 
 classroom discussions as overly aggressive, and they were no more likely 
to say  that students in the class failed to treat each other with respect. 
In an email,  Thompson told me: 
 
I was really surprised that both women and men do not perceive the  
philosophical discussions in their introductory course to be excessively  
combative. Given my experience attending both philosophy talks and  
neuroscience 
talks, I've noticed a distinct difference in the types of  questions asked and 
the way that criticisms are raised.

Notably, the differences in men's and women's responses were equivalent 
when  the course was taught by male and female instructors, but in both cases 
female  students were more likely to disagree with the claim that the 
syllabus included  a "fair proportion" of readings authored by women. In fact, 
the 
readings on the  syllabus were overwhelmingly by men (over 89 percent). And, 
furthermore,  Thompson explained: 
 
This problem is compounded by the fact that introductory philosophy  
textbooks have an even worse gender balance; women account for only 6 percent  
of 
authors in a number of introductory philosophy  textbooks.

Do some of these features of women's experiences make them less likely to  
pursue philosophy? Some additional analyses suggested that they do: the  
researchers found that the perception of the gender ratio on the syllabus and  
the perception of philosophy's usefulness for getting a job were both 
partial  mediators of the relationship between gender and an intent to persist 
in  
philosophy. 
The researchers also considered how students' experiences differed as a  
function of race. In an email, Nahmias told me: 
 
I was a little surprised to see that there were so many parallels in the  
different patterns of responses to our survey between men and women and  
between white and black students.

Adleberg said the data may point to a need for new approaches in the  
classroom: 
 
If we want to attract and retain a more diverse group of students to  
philosophy (which I hope we all do), we may need to change something about how  
we introduce students to philosophy.

Reflecting on their findings so far, Nahmias suggested that philosophy can 
do  a better job introducing itself to incoming students: 
 
We need to figure out why so many women and minorities say "goodbye" to  
philosophy right when we say "hello" to them. College students typically have  
little idea what philosophy is all about when they step into the intro 
class  (almost none had philosophy in high school). First impressions are 
therefore  that much more important. We need more data, but so far, I suspect 
it 
makes a  difference when these students get the impression that men do 
philosophy and  women don't, because, for instance, they only read one woman 
author and 20 men  over the semester. I also think women, minorities, and 
first-generation  college students may be more concerned about whether their 
major 
will help  them get a job. Even if these students leave the intro course 
thinking  philosophy is fun (and to be clear, it looks like white males find it 
more fun  and interesting), they may not take more unless they can see that 
philosophy  majors are valued on the job market. Since philosophy is a good 
major for a  wide variety of careers (and philosophy majors do better than 
almost all other  majors on tests like the LSAT and do well getting into 
various graduate degree  programs), we might need to do a better job of 
"marketing" our  field.

Of course, students'  experiences in introductory philosophy courses are 
but one part of a larger  story — assorted social and cultural forces 
influence women's decisions and  careers at all life stages, with some _special 
 
challenges for mothers_ (http://www.amazon.com/Do-Babies-Matter-Gende
r-Families/dp/0813560802/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1371442107&sr=8-1&keywords=do+babies+ma
tter) . As in math, engineering, and the physical sciences,  some 
gender-based differentiation is likely occurring even before college.  Louise 
Antony, 
for instance, a prominent philosopher who heard the presentation,  was glad 
that research of this sort was being conducted, but worried that the  
gender parity observed in introductory course enrollment numbers could be an  
artifact of university breadth requirements and therefore obscure differences  
between male and female students that develop well before their first  day 
of Philosophy 101. 
To borrow a metaphor  from a paper by Antony herself, philosophy could 
involve a "_perfect storm_ (http://philpapers.org/archive/ANTDVO) " of social 
and  psychological factors that conspire to make it difficult for women to 
persist in  the field. No single intervention is likely to change the climate. 
Nonetheless, the  findings from Adleberg, Thompson and Nahmias suggest some 
simple recommendations  that could have important effects. With the support 
of the Georgia State _Department of Philosophy_ 
(http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwphi/) , for example,  the researchers will test out 
one strategy for 
attracting more women to the  major: this fall, graduate student instructors 
will use 
course syllabi with 20  percent or more female authors, at least doubling 
the current proportions. 
It's not enough, but it's a great place to  start.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to