Male Domination of Philosphy

[Jolie]

Re: Male Domination of Philosphy

@psyah

Peace Jolie

This is not a debate … This is philosophy … the statement “majority rules” does not mean “the majority - rules” - it means that modern democracies assert rule through majority vote … it has nothing to do with the phenomenon of gender representation in philosophy studies. Numbers equal strength - but this a philosophy class or department is not a war zone … so please place your phrases correctly.

Coming back to philosophy - veering away from debate …

This is not a Philosophal discussion, this is a debate on the field of Philosophy. Philosophy the academic discipline and the issue of sexism within the institution, not the studies.

If women are habitually discouraged from studying philosophy by males then you have your case … the fact is what have you done to eliminate other factors? And no … philosophically, why is gender imbalance even a question that must have its answer rooted in prejudice? It could just be a natural thing with nothing to do with men.

We are, or at least I am, not talking about any ‘gender imbalance’ in Philosophy or Literature. My issue is with systematic intimidation, patronization and hostility female students and academics face in Philosophy just like male students often receive the same treatment in a Literature class dominated female students. You repeatedly say discrimination is wrong and I ‘have a case’ yet your post talks about everything but the case I have and the discrimination you think is wrong.

Jolie - you are coming on too strong and not listening to me … philosophy tries to ask difficult questions … so let’s do that … that is what I am doing … I’m not just accepting things - I need to find answers … You have seen that I am indeed comparing influencing through encouragement as a type of “telling people what to do” rather than ordering people it is done in other ways … What I meant by it being the same 100 years ago needs to be looked at in the way I meant it not the way you are taking it …

Again, you have severely misunderstood me if you think my intention was to indulge in any fancy Philosophical debate. I rarely provide the self satisfying answers people look for. I would appreciate if you could kindly focus on offering some words to highlight the practical implication, the cause and the solution to deal with sexism and discrimination in Philosophy the academic discipline. Encouragement is indeed telling what they *can and perhaps should *do, encouragement does not mean people are not told about other ways and options. In free societies, encouragement may or may not work as decisive influence but it is still much better option that ‘ordering’ people what can or cannot be done in other ways.

It still has not been adequately argued from a philosophical POV that gender representation equalisation is a necessary morally right thing to be doing. Yes, everyone should be given a vote, but if the vote unanimously lands in one direction - we don’t do the vote again because we don’t like the imbalance - we merely accept it.

We would not accept the imbalance if the voters were intimidated, threatened and forced to vote for a certain group. Similarly, unequal gender representation must not be accepted on face value as something completely natural if discrimination and patriarchal intimidation is one of the the leading causes behind.

You asked me if I believe in the right to vote … I believe that modern democracies are built on the universal right to vote principle - but I don’t think it is necessarily a great idea to have everyone vote - from a philosophical point of view that is … and one reason for that is opinions of masses can be influenced through media.

There’d always been many different sources of influences effecting human views and decisions.

You asked if I believe in equal employment - if that means making gender, race and religion and sexual orientation equal the numbers of their opposites for some strange adherence to a criteria - I think it wrong. What I do think however is that all people should know who to go to for anything they need.

I agree. Positive discrimination is also dangerous and should be avoided.

But do I believe in human rights? (As perceived by the UN) Why should I? I think there are universal laws that people want to adopt - I don’t think however that they are entirely universal either …

That’s an interesting view but a totally different topic, perhaps for another day.

Unless you know something that I do not … Are women really being turned down for studying philosophy, purely because they are female?

Thanks to all the much needed laws that have been passed in last 100 years to challenge and to ultimately overthrow the evil patriarchal norms, expectations and attitude, such things are not so easy to do. If they do still take place in some form, people have every right and responsibility and ways to raise a voice against such injustice. The more equal, fair and humane the societies aim to become, the more sophisticated discrimination gets.