Guidelines for Submissions

Newsletter Editors

Navigation
    Newsletters Index (07:1)
    apaOnline Home Page

APA Newsletters

Fall 2007
Volume 07, Number 1

Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy

Articles

Previous Article | Index | Next Article

Family Matters: Women in the Profession

Sharon Crasnow
Riverside Community College

By now everyone is well aware that women struggle in the academic world, as they do in many demanding professions; and that struggle seems to be pretty strongly correlated with family. The 2002 Berkeley study by Mason and Goulden indicates that family has a significant negative effect on the persistence and success of women in academia.[1] The causal chain works in the other direction as well. Women who are successful are significantly less likely to have children, more likely to have only one if they do, and more likely to divorce or to separate from their partners. Perhaps your conversations with other women or your own experiences in the profession have indicated to you that this statistical story has a face and voice within philosophy. These papers tell that story to some extent, but they do more than that because these women are philosophers. They have not only lived these experiences but the experiences have been shaped by and have shaped their philosophical concerns, and their philosophical interests have in turn shaped their understanding of their circumstances.

As you read these papers you will find the details of the stories very different from each other. These stories suggest that there are many ways to put together a life in philosophy. This, in itself, is a refreshing change from the idea that there might be only one way to do this. For instance, women are often told, “Don’t have children till you have tenure” or “Never get pregnant in graduate school.” But these papers indicate that there are many ways to construct one’s life, though it is also clear that choices are rarely made without some costs.[2] In some of these papers you may be struck more by the costs, in others, more by the benefits. One revealing theme that emerges is that the costs were frequently unanticipated, but, perhaps surprisingly, so were the benefits.

So, for instance, Joanne Waugh provides “rules” that came out of her own experience in a long-distance commuting relationship that spanned over twenty years, noting how the philosophical directive to “know thyself” took on a particular meaning for her. Rebecca Kukla tells an unusual and fascinating story of the philosophical and the personal inextricably combined in her family and looks at the effect that this has had and continues to have on each. Jean Keller reflects on the interplay between the statistical story and the personal, focusing on how her philosophical interests and professional life were altered by the adoption of her children. Janet Kourany writes a letter to her daughter advising her, and perhaps all young women, on the dangers of making choices that can put you in circumstances where your confidence in your own ability is undermined. Rosie Tong tells a moving story of her own attempts to “have it all” and hopes for a future in which it is possible for women to do this without having to pay such a high price. Finally, Shelley Park describes her life as a “nomad” as she moved between geographical locations and identities all the while resisting classification.

Three of the papers included here were first presented at the March 2006 Pacific APA in Portland, and then again with two additional papers at the joint Eastern SWIP and Society for Analytical Feminism conference in December of the same year. The first panel was organized in part because as a member of the Committee on the Status of Women I had that responsibility for the 2006 Pacific APA meetings. The source of the particular idea for this panel is more complex. I had been thinking about and dealing with questions of family and philosophy for some time, for most of my professional life in fact, though I had never written about these issues. In the summer of 2003, I met several younger women at an NEH seminar. They were grappling with the same concerns that had been so dominant in my own life: juggling work and relationships, children, parents. How does one put all these parts of life together so that everyone flourishes? I saw both my younger and current selves in these women, though we were also dissimilar in many ways. (For instance, they are all very much cleverer than I am!) I felt empathy for them and a strong desire to offer advice. But each life is so different in detail, even though similar in broad outline that any advice seemed as though it would be of limited value. I believed my own experiences were idiosyncratic. But also, it was not clear to me that advice was what was called for. I thought it might be valuable, particularly to younger women in philosophy, to hear each other’s stories, and so I used the opportunity to put together the panel. The idea that the panel should be repeated was an immediate response to the first. Rosie Tong, who chaired the first panel, revealed the story of her three-hour commute to Temple with baby in tow during the discussion. There was not time to hear more that morning and so it was clear that we needed another panel, if only to hear the rest of the story. But more generally, there was a strong desire among those present to do it again. This was more than the autobiographical impulse. That these are the stories of women in philosophy and so had a resonance with the women who were present both as women and as philosophers is part of the reason why these papers—these stories—have the value that they do.

The papers are written in the conversational tone in which they were first delivered, so sit down, read them, and participate in the conversation. Apart from being interesting stories in themselves, these papers have the affect of affirming both the woman telling the story and those to whom they are told. We recognize ourselves here and it is unusual to see ourselves in such a venue. The dominant style of writing in philosophy so discourages the mixing of the personal and philosophical, but surely the philosophy we do is personal in many ways, even when it is not made so explicitly. We are personally committed to the work, doing it is part of who we are as women, as mothers, as lovers, and as daughters. These papers acknowledge that and so acknowledge the lives of women in philosophy.

Let me close by recognizing that these papers are limited in how much they can tell us about all women philosophers, however. One of the philosophical challenges this panel confronts is the tension between the particular and the general. The statistics tell us the story through one means and the individuals tells it through another. But, it is nearly impossible to read the stories of particular individuals without thinking of them as representative. Since that is so, these papers fail to accurately represent because they lack diversity. These papers, even collectively, cannot speak for all women since there are many significant voices missing here—voices of women of color, of single women, of lesbians, bisexual, transgendered women, and of others as well. However, even if all voices were heard, a group of individuals could never present the whole picture unless every single voice were heard. This is a goal worth striving for, but to achieve that goal it is necessary for the conversation to begin and be ongoing. These panels were an attempt to move our private conversations into the public sphere. Let’s continue the conversation and ensure that it is inclusive.

1. Mary Ann Mason and Marc Goulden. “Do Babies Matter? The Effect of Family Formation on the Lifelong Careers of Academic Men and Women.” Academe 88:6 (November-December 2002): 21-27; and Mary Ann Mason and Marc Goulden. “Do Babies Matter (Part II)? Closing the Baby Gap.” Academe 90:6 (November-December 2004): 11-15.

2. Mason and Goulden indicate that there is statistical evidence that these particular rules do have some merit. The papers here remind us that statistics track generalities and not individuals.

Previous Article | Index | Next Article