There's no longer any doubt that the value of thought is on the decline. Middlesex University is closing its Philosophy Dept even though the dept. is ranked world leading and contributes its fair share to the University budget.
Help us do something about it (taken from Nina Power's blog:
To express support and to help with the campaign email Professor Peter Osborne: email@example.com making reference to Middlesex philosophy in the subject line. PLEASE CIRCULATE THIS NEWS WIDELY - closure at Liverpool and cuts at KCL and elsewhere have been avoided due to protests. It IS possible to stop the demented venal idiocy of university management
UPDATE: Meeting next Wednesday, May 5, 7:30pm - 9:00pm, Oakwood Tavern, 155 Bramley Road, Oakwood, London, N14 4XA (Facebook group for meeting)
Join the Save Middlesex philosophy group on Facebook.
University News – Philosophy at Middlesex
UPDATE: What you can do to help - and please do help even if you're not in the UK.
A petition has been made, please sign it to show your support
and also it would be helpful if you could send an email to these peope, resonsible for the decision that has been made.
Vice-Chancellor of the University, Michael Driscoll, firstname.lastname@example.org;
Deputy Vice-Chancellor Research and Enterprise, Waqar Ahmad, email@example.com;
Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic, Margaret House, firstname.lastname@example.org;
Dean of the School of Arts & Education, Ed Esche, email@example.com.
(The full set of emails is firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com).
If you are able to send such an email, it would be helpful if you blind copied (BCC) it to our campaign email, firstname.lastname@example.org.
Wednesday, 28 April 2010
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
So last week, Bidisha published this on the Guardian's comment is free section.
There have been two responses from men involved with the How the Light Gets in Festival:
One from Julian Baggini, which claims that if you had more women on panels at the conference, you would just have more token women on the panels: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/25/women-outnumbered-by-men?showallcomments=true#comment-51
The other from Hilary Lawson, which claims that the object of the festival - to bring philosophy into the lives of everyday people - is more important than spending a bit more time encouraging women to participate: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/26/fighting-philosophy-gender-imbalance
The debates following both articles are really interesting - men expressing fear and resentment about feminists; women re-iterating the cultural conditions that work to subordinate women and exclude them. So who's right?
One of the issues that has yet to be raised was one brought up at the last SWIP (Society for Women in Philosophy) - UK conference I attended. Many women who do philosophy do it in departments other than philosophy departments. On the whole, in the UK, you will find that women make up about 10% of the philosophy departments. Why is this?
I think it's because in the UK, the philosophy that women do doesn't count as philosophy. If, for instance, Judith Butler were in this country, what analytical-based department would she be in? None. The only departments that consider continental philosophy to be philosophy are: Middlesex, Warwick, Dundee, (please do name others). Only in these would Butler's work be called philosophy. I think we'd find her, as I've found many female philosophers, in Modern Language Departments, in Art Departments, in Psychology departments.
So when the male organisers and the male advisors of this festival claim that only 20% of philosophers are women, I suspect they haven't in any way considered that what women do is often not called philosophy at all. As such, they've missed a chance to connect with the female philosophers in this country who are already bringing philosophy to the lives of everyday people in film departments, literature departments, language departments, even history and medicine-based departments. If you ask me, they've missed out on a valuable resource already doing the work that the festival aims to accomplish.
Monday, 26 April 2010
I recently have found myself in disagreement with a group of feminists who identify as 'Female Assigned at Birth' feminists. The blog is located here . As I read this blog, I quickly became perplexed about the lack of intellectual rigour at work in the discussion. I suppose I'd become so used to talking to feminist who were wiling to disagree with my using the basic tools of research and listening. My bubble has bursts with the discovery of a set that seek to demean other women by treating them with disrespect (acting condescending towards them and by calling them names).
BUT then! A light at the end of the tunnel appeared. Quiet Riot Girl sent me a link to her recent blog on puritanical feminism. I now have language in which to think my reaction to this group, and I'm grateful for it. Check out Quiet Riot Girl here.
Anyone want to put a panel together on Levinas and Kristeva?? Or, Levinas and Irigaray?
Levinas and Psychoanalysis/Psychotherapy: A Conversation
Seattle University October 22-24, 2010
Call for Papers
The philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas is distinctly important for psychotherapy. He reminds us of the command to be responsible for the Other person. Informed by Levinas’ ethical phenomenology, the primacy of the immediate therapeutic face-to-face relationship challenges and haunts our clinical practice and theories. It forces an evolution in our conceptualizations and how we, as clinicians, attend to the Other. Attention to the “between,” as Buber would say, and the responsible “facing,” as Levinas deepens this, can also be seen in some of the recent shifts in psychoanalytic discourse and clinical emphasis. The terms “Other,” “asymmetrical,” and the “interhuman/intersubjective” occupy a shared space in Levinas’ thought and contemporary psychoanalytic discourse. Attunement, attention, and recognition of the Other are core concerns in both circles, yet their disparate meanings are difficult to parse out. The purpose of this seminar is to investigate how Levinasian ideas have and continue to influence the work of psychoanalysts, as well as other psychotherapists, for the mutual enrichment of meaning in clinical practice.
Keynote Address by Dr. Paul Marcus
Dr. Paul Marcus is a Supervising and Training Analyst at the National Psychological Association for Psychoanalysis. His books include Being for the Other: Emmanuel Levinas, Ethical Living, and Psychoanalysis, Ancient Religious Wisdom, Spirituality, and Psychoanalysis: Autonomy in the Extreme Situation, and a forthcoming book titled In Search of the Good Life: Emmanuel Levinas, Psychoanalysis, and the Art of Living.
Call For Papers
We invite papers and posters that seek some form of interchange between Levinas and psychotherapy. Papers geared toward clinical work are highly encouraged. Abstracts no longer than 250 words should be submitted via Word Document to both email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org. Deadline for submission is July 15th, 2010. Notifications will be sent to presenters by August 1st. Submission should include the following:
Author(s) name(s) Working Title 250 word abstract Institutional Affiliation Preference for Paper or Poster (if submitting as a paper presentation, indicate
willingness to present poster if not accepted as paper) Contact information (including preferred phone number and e-mail address)
Please and future registration: http://www.seattleu.edu/artsci/map/inner.aspx?id=7174
go to the conference website (hosted by Seattle University) for more information
Also, please feel free to inquire further by contacting George Kunz (email@example.com) or David Goodman (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Nina Power's blog pointed me to this excellent piece on gaga:
I just adore smart women.
I know it's not feminist, per se, but Irigaray has shown that Heidegger can be read from a female subjectivity in interesting ways:
Call For Papers: Twenty-First Century Heidegger
DATE: 10th-11th September 2010
VENUE: UCD Humanities Institute of Ireland, University College Dublin
Professor Miguel de Beistegui
The University of Warwick
Dr Joseph Cohen
University College Dublin
This two-day conference intends to explore, expand, and contest
contemporary research on the German phenomenologist Martin Heidegger. The
principal aim of the conference is to examine the oppositional,
complementary, and sometimes contradictory ways in which Heideggerian
scholarship has been developed in the first decade of the twenty first
century. Scholars are invited to critically address fundamental questions
in the Heideggerian scholarship, including its direction, problems, and
potential. The conference hopes to bring together the increasingly
disparate approaches to Heidegger’s work, whether those approaches are
traditional in their employment of phenomenology and hermeneutics or
whether they apply Heidegger’s thinking in new and surprising ways. Papers
from a wide variety of disciplines including, but not limited to,
philosophy, psychology, psychiatry, cognitive sciences, archaeology,
anthropology, sociology, political science, language studies, literature,
film studies, geography, and architecture are encouraged. It is hoped that,
by bringing together both traditional and contemporary scholars, the
conference can initiate, facilitate, and foster further research and
collaboration related to Heidegger’s philosophy.
The following list—which is by no means exhaustive or exclusive—contains
some of the themes the conference intends to address:
Classic problems and questions of phenomenology and hermeneutics
The overcoming of metaphysics as a task of a new epoch
Papers on recently published volumes from Heidegger’s Gesamtausgabe and
recently published translations
The significance or insignificance of the existential analytic for
Space, place, and dwelling in Heidegger’s work
Potential applications of Heidegger’s topology, topography, and geography
Heidegger’s influence on environmental thought and architecture
Heidegger’s relation to literary and film studies
Heidegger’s relationship to Eastern thought and his reception in the East
Political and social issues arising from Heidegger’s engagement with
Heidegger’s contribution to the philosophy of science
Heidegger among the psychiatrists, psychologists, and cognitive scientists
The post-modern and post-continental engagement with Heidegger
The future of Heidegger’s philosophical thought
The conference language is English, and each speaker will be allotted
twenty minutes of presentation time. Please e-mail an abstract of
approximately 250 words to: email@example.com. Please include a
separate page with the title of the paper, the name of the author, your
institutional affiliation, and e-mail address.
ABSTRACT SUBMISSION DEADLINE: July 23th
Dr. Tziovanis Georgakis
Friday, 23 April 2010
There's a great article today in the Guardian about tokenism in the arts by Bidisha. Check it out here.
My general response to events that feature either no women on panels or only put one woman on the panel of 4 or 5 is that I just don't attend. I won't pay for events that are unconsciously (or consciously) sexist. Bidisha's article has inspired me to ask - what if we boycott an event in London this summer? Is it possible to put word out to the extent that on, say, the 3rd day of the How the Light Gets In festival, no women attend? Would anyone notice? Might make for an interesting experiment.
Thursday, 22 April 2010
I've been reading a whole helluva lot lately, so I can't be sure who's written that when men are unequal and women are unequal, we reach a certain level of equality. I thought we might approach inequality as one would a negotiation. How would such a negotiation go? Imagine a boardroom where all the men and women of the world are sat on opposite sides of the table. (The transfolks, androgynous folks and everyone else of indeterminate sex would also need to sit on the women's side simply because women don't tend to kill these people and men do.) So, we're in the boardroom:
The women agree that the men can have professional sport and that they'll take majority representation in government (in the UK, this would be 70%).
The men agree that they would like to keep objectifying women as sex objects and in return will give up prostitution and pornography.
The women agree to buy into the illusion that the Iraq war is about democracy and the men agree to shut down Fox news.
Everyone's happy until the women decide they're done with childcare. They agree men should take over childcare and in return women will support the pub industry.
I especially like this last solution. :-)
Sarah Hickman is a local Texas singer/ songwriter. This song includes an awesome genealogy of women who've left the world better than they've found it, something we're all quite certain Palin will not accomplish. Check it out.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
So here's the major plot line: There's this guy in his 30s who teaches Spanish at a high school. He has two women after him (sometimes 3). These include: his wife, his co-worker and random other hotties that find him adorable.
Here's the second major plot line: There's this guy in his teens who's captain of the football team, quarter back and male lead in the glee club. He has two women after him. These include: the girl he thought he knocked up and the female lead in glee club.
Is anyone surprised that the show is deeply, deeply sexist? It portrays a world in which girls moon over guys they can't get and guys feel confused and often quite lucky that so many girls moon after them.
And yet! Who's the most interesting person on Glee:
Without question, if Jane Lynch wasn't covering the comedy portion of the show, it would look a lot like High School Musical (shudder). Jane Lynch, I would argue, also played one of the most interesting characters on the L Word. I've chosen in my own feminist way to ignore the moony-boy plot lines in Glee and cheer at the fact that a woman is doing brilliant comedy on television.
Stepping off my soap box . . .
Check it out!
In conversation with Julia Kristeva
Jacqueline Rose and Marian Hobson talk to Julia Kristeva about her life and work
6.30pm - 8.00pm, followed by a drinks reception
Monday, 24 May 2010
British Academy, 10 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1
Julia Kristeva, FBA, a Corresponding Fellow of the British Academy, is a writer, psychoanalyst, a professor at the Institut Universitaire de France and a full member of the Paris Société psychoanalytique. She is a major theorist of literature, someone who could claim to have introduced a whole way of writing about literature to Western Europe (she is Bulgarian in origin). She is also an important theorist of psychoanalysis and feminism, and a novelist. Her work has been recognised by many awards: the Holberg Prize (2004), the Hannah Arendt Prize (2006), the Vaclav Havel Prize (2008) and the 2010 Prix Simone de Beauvoir.
She has also (and sometimes at the same time) been a Head of Department at Paris7, where she directs the doctoral programme 'Langue, literature, image,' a member of the Economic Environmental and Social Council of France, and was recently charged by President Sarkozy with the composition of a report on 'The intercultural vocation of French as an international language: the cultural message of France'. She is the author of some thirty works including Revolution in Poetic Language, Tales of Love, Black Sun: Depression and Melancholia, Proust and the Sense of Time, the trilogy Female Genius: Hannah Arendt, Melanie Klein and Colette, Hate and Forgiveness, The Incredible Need to Believe (2007), Possessions: A Novel, Murder in Byzantium, and two works soon to be published in English, Seule une femme and Thérèse mon amour (2008).
About the Speakers
Marian Hobson, CBE, FBA, is Professorial Research Fellow at Queen Mary University of London. Jacqueline Rose, FBA, is Professor of English at Queen Mary University of London.
Registration is not required for this event. Seats will be allocated on arrival.
This visit is made possible by the support from the S T Lee Visiting Fellowship fund, endowed through the generosity of Dr S T Lee of Singapore.
Tuesday, 20 April 2010
Good morning blogland.
I thought I'd take a moment and share with you what you're reading. There aren't many 'yous' in the 'you're' I'm referring to. I get about 30 visitors a day, which I think is marvellous considering that all I post are updates on academic feminist events going on the in the world.
However, there is a trend in your reading that is disturbing me. Most people who visit this blog are looking for something on Christina Hoff Sommers. (Now that I've written her name, I'll get 15 new visits). I find this incredibly unsettling. Here I am telling you about Irigaray, about Kristeva (who by the way is giving a talk in London in May) about Nina Power and Ariel Levy and you're here to find Christina Hoff Sommers. My only hope is that you're looking for dirt to support an argument detailing why that woman should neither be teaching nor publishing under the category of feminism, even as feminism dissident.
Here's some ammunition:
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html Hoff Sommers thinks feminists are creating a 'rape culture' on American campuses. She thinks that the 1 in 4 statistic published by studies is creating unnecessary feelings of anxiety amongst young women. Hoff fails, however, to consider the reality of rape - that most victims know the men that rape them - those men are their fathers, their husbands, boyfriends and friends. For an argument that DOES consider the reality of rape, check out Kat Banyard's The Equality Illusion. It's well-written and well-researched, meaning that if you choose to disagree, she's pointed very clearly to where you can take issue.
And Sommers book on how feminism has harmed boys? 'The WAR against boys?' Good lord. let's read the snippet so as to understand the lack of academic rigour in this book:
'It's a bad time to be a boy in America. As the century drew to a close, the defining event for American girls was the triumph of the U.S. women's soccer team. For boys, the symbolic event was the mass killing at Columbine High School.'
Wait, did she just say that the 'defining' event for girls was the triumph of a soccer team? Unless you follow women's sport (which I don't and I suspect a large proportion of American's don't either) how would you know the girl's soccer team won anything? I seriously doubt that such an event was 'defining'. Hoff Sommers seems bent on perpetuating the sex divide. Rather than consider that both girls and boys suffer in different ways and that by creating environments in which both are encouraged to communicate and to think scientifically, Hoff Sommers argues that there is a 'War against boys'.
At the very least, she should be ignored for perpetuating the myth that the sexes are 'waring'. This myth gets us (women/ men, children, the elderly, the poor) no-where.
Monday, 19 April 2010
I suppose we should feel grateful for the 10 women participating in the 'philosophy sessions' at the 'How the Light Gets In' philosophy and music festival in Hay. I hope that the women invited are outspoken and confident as they are the minority in each session they've been asked to participate in. No 'philosophy session' in the line-up has more women on the panel than men. Surprising? no. Disappointing? yes.
Here the programem:
I admit, I've caught the Gaga bug. After watching the video of Telephone, I went out and bought all things GAGA. Lately, I've been wondering what the feminist response has been to this video. This is the explicit version:
There are some well-thought out feminist responses to this video. See, for example, http://feministhemes.com/telephone-lady-gaga/ , http://feministmusicgeek.com/2010/03/12/music-video-lady-gaga-and-beyonces-telephone/ and especially (like really go read this one) http://bullybloggers.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/lady-gagas-lesbian-phallus-2/
There are also too many poorly-written, standard responses that basically say: 'Gaga is not a feminist because she places herself as being the object of male gaze'. These are well, boring. There are also a number blogs that critique the hierarchy of race in the video and blogs that critique the question of transgender bodies and voices in the video.
Unlike many, I don't find this video problematic. This is because the video raises more question than it provided answers. This is, in essence, its post-structuralist appeal. Julia Kristeva since 2000 has blatantly argued that a new definition of the human subject is being issued in. This subject is not based on the certainty of its conviction, nor on foundational 'truths' that hold it together. Rather, this subject is based on a never-ending 'constructing-deconstructing' cycle in which it builds and tears down its identity as well as the identities of those around it. Raising questions is central to this subjectivity.
Kristeva goes on to argue - particularly in This Incredible Need to Believe - that the role of psychoanalysis is to aid in the construction/ deconstruction cycle. In so doing, the analyst enables the analysand to turn the cycle, which is in essence a quest(ion) for knowledge - into action. In other words, the analyst enables the analysand to turn its thought into action. Equipped with the ability to turn thought into action, the analysand enters the world and creates bonds with others. Thus, psychoanalysis takes the non-speaking, withdrawn, stagnant individual and guides them to become a dynamic, speaking individual capable of connecting to others. It does this by providing a narrative for the construction/ deconstruction cycle. Can Lady Gaga be said to be doing the same thing?
To answer this question, consider for a moment who Lady Gaga's audience is. Most likely, it is not anyone reading this blog (and if you are 21 and reading this blog, woo hoo!). Gaga's demographic is made up of those between 17 to 27 years old. See here http://www.musicmetric.com/tag/fan-demographics/. Recall, if you will (or grab someone young and ask them), your identity when you were 21. It was in flux. Who you are at 21 is up for grabs. Lady Gaga's ability to re-envision herself and, more importantly, to be comfortable re-envisioning herself is hugely appealing for this folks. In essence, Gaga provides a narrative about an identity in flux. She reminds them, and me really, that change is constant - that identity remains unfixed. Becoming comfortable with that seems to me to be the biggest challenge of being human. If Lady Gaga instills confidence by describing the construction/ deconstruction of identity, she might very well be more successful in instilling feminist values than those of us working on feminist philosophy.
The NEH (National Endowment for Humanities) recently asked a single mother to prove that she had adequate child-care arrangements for her 12 year old son prior to offering her a place on a summer course. Though the case was settled privately, SWIP UK president Jennifer Saul is requesting that letters be sent to the NEH asking for a public statement. Saul's statement and the letter are below:
I'm writing to you as people concerned about the state of women in
philosophy. As you may be aware, a woman philosopher (Christina Van
Dyke) was recently the subject of some fairly deplorable treatment by
the directors of an NEH Summer Institute (see:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/04/12/qt). While the NEH has
acted promptly to address the matter in private, so far their public
response has consisted entirely of those few comments reported in the
IHE article. Particularly given the wide publicity this event
received, however, a purely private response by the NEH seems
inadequate. As a result, some of Christina's friends - with her
advice and oversight - have drafted a form letter of protest to the
NEH, asking for a strong and unequivocal public response to the
matter. The letter is included below, and if you're sympathetic to
its content I strongly encourage you to sign a copy and send it to
firstname.lastname@example.org (or, alternatively, write your own letter and send it).
Your help and support in this matter would be deeply appreciated.
Professor Jennifer Saul
Director of Learning and Teaching
Department of Philosophy
University of Sheffield
45 Victoria Street, Sheffield S3 7QB
Ph: 0114 222 0578
[NAME and INSTITUTION]
To Whom it May Concern: I am writing to express my concern over the recent treatment of Prof. Christina Van Dyke by the directors of the NEH Summer Institute “Cultural Hybridities”. As you will no doubt be aware, Prof. Van Dyke - who is a single mother - was, three days after her initial acceptance to the Institute, given twenty-four hours notice by the Institute’s directors to demonstrate specific, full-time childcare plans for her twelve-year-old son. She was further told that if she could not demonstrate these childcare arrangements to the unspecified satisfaction of the directors (a full three months in advance of her attendance) her acceptance would be withdrawn and her place given to an alternate candidate. The letter which made these demands of her not only claimed to do so in consultation with the NEH, but also called into question her responsibility as a parent and the seriousness of her interest in the Institute. As I am sure you will agree, that this occurred is nothing short of outrageous. I am aware that the demands made of Prof. Van Dyke did not come from anyone directly employed by the NEH, and were in fact inconsistent with NEH policies. However, the event took place under the auspices of the NEH, was allowed via the procedures for the acceptance of (and communication with) applicants which the NEH has set up, and was carried out by academics directly funded by the NEH in the management of an NEH Summer Institute. The NEH thus bears at least partial responsibility, and needs to act accordingly. We understand and appreciate that the NEH has dealt with the matter in private to Prof. Van Dyke's satisfaction, ensuring her acceptance to the Institute and clearly communicating to the directors that their demands were unacceptable. However, due to the publicity the incident has received, a public response is by the NEH is also needed. Thus far the NEH’s public comment has consisted only of a statement, reported by Inside Higher Ed, that if in fact such demands had been made of Prof. Van Dyke (who is anonymous in the IHE article and various blog reports about the case) they would not be consistent with NEH policies. The gravity of this issue - and the worrying potential that it is not an isolated case, but simply an isolated publicizing - requires a strong and unequivocal public response. Such a response would, at minimum:
• Confirm the report discussed by Inside Higher Ed. In that article, the NEH spokesperson who was quoted raised some question as to its veracity. The NEH should now state that the report was in fact true.
• Publicly express regret that an event of this kind took place under NEH auspices.
• State specifically what the NEH has done to redress this particular situation and any measures it has taken in attempt to avoid recurrence of similar problems in the future.
• Clarify the relevant aspects of the NEH’s Equal Opportunity Employment policy which prohibit the kinds of demands made of Prof. Van Dyke.
A clear public statement from the NEH, meeting at least those standards laid out above, is particularly pressing in this case due to the wide publicity it has received. Anyone reading about it who might in the future find themselves in a similar situation - either as someone of whom such demands are made, or as someone in a position to make such demands - needs to know that the NEH will tolerate nothing of the kind. It is bad enough that this event occurred at all. The NEH will only make it worse if they fail to respond appropriately. [SIGNED]
Friday, 16 April 2010
Obama orders hospitals to grant same-sex couples visitation rights
By Michael D. Shear
Washington Post staff writer
Thursday, April 15, 2010; 8:08 PM
President Obama on Thursday signed a memorandum requiring hospitals to allow gays and lesbians to have non-family visitors and to grant their partners medical power of attorney.
The president ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to prohibit discrimination in hospital visitation. The memo is scheduled to be made public Friday morning, according to an administration official and another source familiar with the White House decision.
An official said the new rule will affect any hospital that receives Medicare or Medicaid funding.
The decision injects the president squarely into the debate over gay marriage by attempting to end the common practice by many hospitals of insisting that only family members by blood or marriage be allowed to visit patients.
Gay activists have argued for years that recognizing gay marriages would ease the emotional pain associated with not being able to visit their partners during a health crisis.
By contrast, opponents of gay marriage have said the visitation issue is a red herring, and have argued that advocates want to provide special rights for gays and lesbians that others do not have.
The memorandum from Obama to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, made public late Thursday night, orders new rules that would ensure hospitals "respect the rights of patients to designate visitors."
Obama says the new rules should require that hospitals not deny visitation privileges on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
"Every day, all across America, patients are denied the kindnesses and caring of a loved one at their sides whether in a sudden medical emergency or a prolonged hospital stay," Obama says in the memo.
Affected, he said, are "gay and lesbian American who are often barred from the bedsides of the partners with whom they may have spent decades of their lives -- unable to be there for the person they love, and unable to act as a legal surrogate if their partner is incapacitated."
Obama's actions are the latest attempt by his administration to slowly advance the agenda of a constituency that strongly supported his presidential campaign.
In his first 15 months in office, Obama has hailed the passage of hate crime legislation and hosted the first gay pride day celebration at the White House. Last month, Obama's top military and defense officials testified before Congress in favor of getting rid of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays in the military.
But the moves have been too slow for some in the gay community, who have urged the president to champion their causes head-on. One prominent gay blogger, John Aravosis, wrote last October that Obama's "track record on keeping his gay promises has been fairly abominable."
Thursday, 15 April 2010
Check out Power's March 2010 talk Feminist Manifesto for the 21st Century:
I admit, this one sounds fascinating!
- death and sex, the death drive, taboo
- the right to die (suicide, euthanasia, self-sacrifice)
- the right to kill (death penalty, eugenics, assisted dying, sacrifice)
- political assassination, genocide, mass-murder, war, suicide bombings
- burial customs, graveyards, necropolis, etc.
- privacy/intimacy of death – death and alienation
- mourning, bereavement – coping with grief
- The cult of death, the celebrity death (James Dean, Princess Di, Michael Jackson, etc.)
Wednesday, 14 April 2010
2010 Law and Leadership
|"Leadership is and should be viewed as a calling. You have to know with confidence that you can make a difference, and, more strongly, that you should make a difference." - Michael Useem|
Professor of Management, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania
Described by its alumnae as "…enriching, unforgettable and extremely stimulating," the Law and Leadership Summer Program (LLSP) is the most outstanding and unique leadership development program offered to Muslim women from around the world. LLSP incorporates the study of Islamic law as a means to foster leadership qualities in Muslim women so that they may be well positioned to implement progressive and orderly change.
Each year the program selects approximately 25 outstanding Muslim women to take courses on Islamic Jurisprudence, Comparative Law, Conflict Resolution, and Leadership Development. This year's class included participants from Canada, Belgium, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and the United States. In addition to the diversity reflected by their ethnic backgrounds, the women in the program represent a wide range of professions including law students, lawyers, professors, politicians, social service providers, and activists from different non-profit organizations.
Previous classes have been led by some of the most prominent professors, lawyers, and community leaders in the field. A recurrent speaker at LLSP, Imam Muhammad Magid of the All Dulles Area Muslim Society (ADAMS) Center in Sterling, Virginia, provided invaluable insight into the foundations of the Qur'an, hadith, and ijtihad. Dr. Amr Abdullah, Professor and Vice Rector for Academic Affairs, University for Peace in Costa Rica, through his courses on Conflict Resolution, provided his students with effective strategies to implement their new-found skills. Students were further trained on confidence and leadership through a series of courses on leadership development led by professors from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
As mentioned above, the Law and Leadership Summer Program consists of four components: Islamic Jurisprudence, Comparative Law, Conflict Resolution, and Leadership Development. Each component complements and builds upon the skills offered to the students.
Islamic Jurisprudence serves as the foundation of the program. In addition to learning about the history of Islamic jurisprudence, students are introduced to the basics of interpreting the Qur'an and hadith. With this knowledge, students then discuss topics pertaining to women and human rights within the context of Islamic law. The goal of this portion of LLSP is to ensure that Muslim women can articulate opinions on various issues of concern to their communities, based upon an informed knowledge of Islam.
The Comparative Law component of the program further enhances the student's understanding of the law by emphasizing the principles of the American Constitution, its legal parameters, and the practical implications it has on the development of legislation in a society with a major American Muslim population. Students were given the opportunity to discuss issues as diverse as the Enforcement of the Islamic Marriage Contract in American Courts.
Equipped with new knowledge of Islamic Jurisprudence and Comparative Law, students are well-positioned to communicate concerns to their respective communities. However, to ensure that these concerns are articulated in the most effective manner, LLSP trains women in the ways of Conflict Resolution. Through a curriculum involving group discussions and role play, the students are shown various methods of handling resistance and working as part of a team. It is only natural that the program builds upon the theme of Conflict Resolution by offering trainings in Leadership Development.
Last year’s Leadership Development component of LLSP included speeches from renowned guests, such Professor Useem and Professor McGrath from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. This component bolsters confidence in its students by improving their presentation and organizational skills so that they can properly engage their public. Courses from last year’s LLSP included the Leadership Moment, Developing Leadership Strategies, Women and Leadership, an Interactive Taping Session, and Building Successful Relationships with Journalists and the Media.
The Law and Leadership Summer Program is truly remarkable in its structure and content. It is not only a chance to tap into your leadership potential, it is also an opportunity to create an unbreakable bond of friendship with the most talented and driven women the Ummah has to offer.
To learn more about the application process please email your queries toLLSP@karamah.org!
Have you been wondering where all the young feminists have gone and what they are thinking about? I have! This workshop is an opportunity to find out:
University Place Room 6.207
Call for papers & participation
Thinking & Ideology: Intersectional young feminism
Doing & Activism: Reclaiming young feminism
Contact & registration
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
This looks like an awesome opportunity for those who speak French! I'd apply, if I could.
Postgraduate and Research Officer
School of Modern Languages and Cultures
The University of Nottingham
Nottingham NG7 2RD
Tel: +44 (0)115 84 68317
Fax: +44 (0)115 84 68587
Secretary to the Board of Nottingham French Studies
Monday - Wednesday 9.00 am - 4.30 pm
Female Chauvinist Pigs - Ariel Levy
The Equality Illusion: The Truth about Women and Men Today - Kat Banyard
One Dimensional Woman - Nina Power
Living Dolls - Natasha Walter
What are you reading?
Monday, 12 April 2010
Also, the North American Levinas Society is hosting its annual conference in Paris this year. The conference program is jam-packed. Unfortunately, there are only one or two sessions devoted to women and/ or the feminine. My hope is that both run as a thread throughout all the papers. However, that wasn't really the case at the Seattle conference I attended. The conference program is not yet up on the NALS website, which is here: http://www.levinas-society.org/home.html. I'm sure it will be shortly.
I'm really looking forward to the Irigaray conference in May. I think it's fantastic that one conference can bring together so many people from so many different countries. The program was announced today. Here it is: