Ook dit jaar is SWIP-NL weer trotse sponsor van Conference by Women in Philosophy. De organisatoren bieden wederom een vol programma met interessante sprekers en panels. Zie de pagina voor alle informatie.
De conferentie is maandag 3 juli en vindt plaats aan de Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam. Aanmelden is nog mogelijk!
Gender, huidskleur, leeftijd, inkomen, geaardheid, religie, accent, beperking – het beïnvloedt allemaal hoe mensen jou beoordelen en behandelen. En dus ook of jij die baan krijgt of iemand anders met hetzelfde CV.
Mensenrechtenactivist Kimberlé Crenshaw beschreef dit met de term intersectionaliteit, die zij in de jaren ’80 ontwikkelde in de strijd voor rechten van zwarte vrouwen. Zij liet zien hoe seksisme en racisme vaak afzonderlijk bevochten worden – bijvoorbeeld in wetten tegen discriminatie. Intersectionaliteit is de theorie dat de institutionele doorwerking van vooroordelen en oude patronen rondom onze individuele aspecten elkaar juist kruisen en versterken.
Intersectioneel denken en doen betekent dan: analyseren welke privileges of achterstand aspecten als islamitisch, laagopgeleid, jong, cisgender, zwart of Aziatisch en hun combinaties opleveren. En hoe we daar in ons handelen rekening mee kunnen houden. Hokjesdenken 2.0.
Tijdens Vrouwenlogica V: Intersectionaliteit – hokjesdenken 2.0 onderzoeken we hoe intersectionaliteit concreet werkt. Hoe pak je dingen zelf intersectioneel aan – tijdens werk, op straat, in het café? Vrouwelijke filosofen en ervaringsdeskundigen gaan in gesprek over hoe hokjes doorwerken in onze samenleving en wat we kunnen doen om scheve verhoudingen recht te zetten.
Dit programma is een samenwerking van SWIP-NL, De Nieuwe Liefde en VG Amsterdam.
Datum: maandag 29 mei 2017
Tijd: 20.00 tot 22.30 uur
Locatie: De Nieuwe Liefde, Da Costakade 102, Amsterdam
Aanmelden en kaartverkoop: De Nieuwe Liefde
Op 29 april 2017 houdt Karen Vintges de eerste Hypatia-lezing: ‘Simone de Beauvoir en de supervrouw: feminisme versus neoliberalisme’.
Zij gaat in op de kritiek van Simone de Beauvoir op de supervrouw die perfectie en persoonlijk succes nastreeft op elk gebied. Dit neoliberaal persoonsmodel verspreidt zich vandaag over de wereld als de zoveelste mythe over de vrouw. Volgens De Beauvoir gaat feminisme niet over persoonlijk succes en carrière maar over een samenleving waarin solidariteit en betrokkenheid centraal staan. Feminisme vanuit marktdenken leidt ertoe dat feminisme alles kan zijn, van paaldansen tot carrière maken. De Beauvoirs kritische feminisme kan ons weer inspireren tot werkelijk engagement.
De Hypatia-lezing is een initiatief van SWIP-NL, Society for Women in Philosopy. Met het instellen van deze jaarlijkse lezing wil de vereniging voor vrouwen in de filosofie een podium bieden aan vrouwelijke filosofen die werkzaam zijn in Nederland en Vlaanderen.
In 2018 zal voor het eerst de tweejaarlijkse Hypatia-prijs worden uitgereikt aan het beste filosofische werk geschreven door een vrouw. Hypatia (ca 355-415) was een Griekse filosofe, befaamd om haar wiskundige en astronomische kennis. Tegenwoordig fungeert ze als symbool van het feminisme.
Karen Vintges is sociaal en politiek filosoof aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Deze lezing is tevens de presentatie van haar nieuwe boek A New Dawn for the Second Sex: Women’s Freedom Practices in World Perspective. Amsterdam University Press, 216 p., ISBN 9789089646026.
U bent van harte welkom op 29 april!
Locatie: Theater Perdu
Adres: Kloveniersburgwal 86, Amsterdam
Tijd: 14.00 uur tot 16.00 uur. Inloop vanaf 13.30 uur.
Toegang: gratis. Graag wel even aanmelden via info@swip-filosofie.nl.
Over ‘A New Dawn for the Second Sex’:
To what extent is Simone de Beauvoir’s study The Second Sex still relevant? From her work it emerges that patriarchy is a many-headed monster. Over the past decades, various heads of this monster have been slayed: important breakthroughs have been achieved by and for women in law, politics, and economics. Today, however, we witness movements in the opposite direction, such as a masculinist political revival in different parts of the world, the spread of the neoliberal myth of the Super Woman, the rise of transnational networks of trafficking in women and children, and a new international ‘Jihadism’. This suggests that patriarchy is indeed a Hydra: a multi-headed monster that grows several new heads every time one head is cut off. Since different – often hybrid – heads of patriarchy dominate in different settings, feminism requires a variety of strategies. Women’s movements all over the world today are critically creating new models of self and society in their own contexts. Drawing on notions of Beauvoir, as well as Michel Foucault, this book outlines a ‘feminism in a new key’ which consists of women’s various freedom practices, each hunting the Hydra in their own key – but with mutual support.
A few days ago, SWIP-NL, together with other researchers, sent protest letters to the organization and speakers of the G10 of Economy and Philosophy 2017. The program presents a predominantly white male line-up. In response, the spokesman of the organization, Boudewijn Richel, clearly states that he does not share our concern with gender equality and diversity practices:
“To say we need more women or we need more coloured people or whatever is not our aim and unfortunately not a priority.”
Since, so often, these important discussions remain in the private realm, we decided to respond publicly in hopes of starting a broader discussion. We also cite passages from Richel’s letter in order to clarify our response and comments. (The citations in our text are literal quotations from Richel’s response to our protest letter. We chose not to publish the entire response.) Feel free to contribute to the discussion in comments to this post.
Here’s how Richel’s response started:
“Dear feminists! Again We are confronted with strange voices and obviously you have not learned from the detailed letter our *** coorganiser of the G10 has written to you Last year!”
Dear Mr. Richel – These “strange voices” are merely the voices of people who share their concerns. In our view, it is you who did not learn from last year, when we raised the same problem about the all male and all white line up.
In defense, Richel exclaims:
“You are attacking a basic female organisation, I am the only man!“
The fact that Richel is the only male organizer in the apparently tripartite organization is of course by no means an excuse for the lack of diversity and gender equality in the program. The presence of women in an organization does not imply concern for diversity or knowledge of implicit bias in selecting speakers.
Richel explains that gender and diversity practices are not a concern, nor a priority of the G10: “The G10 is not a political vehicle to promote or disagree with any political ideas whatsoever . It is founded for the investigation of new ideas and follows the rules of science not the rules of gender politics So to say we need more women or we need more coloured people or whatever is not our aim and unfortunately not a priority.”
He seems unaware of the fact that, in looking for new ideas, people tend often to overlook those written by persons who are not white, male, heterosexual – and our list could go on.
Mr. Richel – Since you bring up the subject of “science” we would invite you to take some of these scientific tests on implicit bias: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html.
According to Richel, our criticism is not realistic:
“I think one has to face also a bit reality. There is only one Zizek and one Sloterdijk and they are not from Holland unfortunately . and their is only one Siedentop and we choose the two best dutch commentators to be part of the discussions unfortunately for them they are males.”
“One has to face a bit reality.” Indeed, Mr. Richel. The reality is that women and non-white people are generally not on a person’s radar when selecting speakers for an event, especially in the fields of philosophy or economics. The reality is that this also impedes the process of choosing “the two best dutch commentators”. We would have gladly assisted you in finding speakers, as we offered to do last year.
Generally, the topic of the G10 is the Future. Most philosophers and economists write and speak with an eye on the future. We are convinced that, if one would want to present an actual panoptic of what philosophers and economists have to say about the future in 2017 – and, therefore, give your audience what they are coming for – this can only be done if the criterium for selecting speakers is inclusive.
Mr. Richel furthermore suggests that we can discuss gender politics with other women philosophers:
“We booked for next year already an american Female ***, with her you can discuss all gender politics as you might know she does that much better as i can do.”
In all honesty, we think that in his response, Mr. Richel clarifies very aptly why he himself might want to discuss gender politics with someone more knowledgeable than himself – whether or not a “Female”.
Finally, Richel brings in a financial argument. He writes that diversity practices are a concern for students who go to funded universities; not for privately funded organizations such as the G10, which after all not supposed to worry about equal representation:
“Young dutch students go for almost free to university and therefore you might think it would be nice if we could promote a bit more coloured people from Africa or so since in case. The G10 has no funds anymore Government will donate money as she does with your university and the payment of your study. The G10 is a privately funded forum…”
In the same paragraph, he also reiterates the point that the selection procedure has been based on what, earlier on in the letter, he called “scientific” criteria, rather than political support for “minorities”: the organizers have looked for “quality” only.
Richel signs the letter with the request to share it with others: “Thank you very much for your consideration and it would be most helpful and honest if you send my answer attached to your letter to for instance to *** whom you addressed already on saturday evening without asking for our answer and to others you might consider !
sincerely yours ,
The only man in The G10 organisation who was awake on saturdayevening
Boudewijn Richel”
Despite the petition and signatures, the organization G10 clearly states that gender equality & diversity practices simply have no priority. Please take this in consideration when deciding to attend this event as speaker or participant. Feel free to share your thoughts and continue the discussion!
A few days ago, SWIP-NL, together with other researchers, sent letters of protest to the organization and speakers of the G10 of Economy and Philosophy 2017. The program presents a predominantly white male line-up. In response, the spokesman of the organization clearly states that he does not share our concern with gender equality and diversity practices – despite the petition and signatures, which began over a year ago:
“To say we need more women or we need more coloured people or whatever is not our aim and unfortunately not a priority.”
Please take this in consideration when deciding to attend this event as speaker or participant!
We wrote a response to the organizer, which can be found here. Feel free to contribute to the discussion on the page.
Eerder publiceerden we al de protestbrief aan de organisatie van de G10 van de Economie en Filosofie, 2017, i.v.m. het gebrek aan diversiteit aan sprekers.
Wij schreven ook de sprekers aan, voor zover wij over hun email-adressen beschikking hadden. Hieronder de brief.
Onderwerp: Lack of diversity at G10 of Economy and Philosophy
Dear xxxx
Next week, you will be participating in the G10 van de Economie en de Filosofie in Amsterdam. As you can see here the G10 has invited seventeen male speakers and one female, almost all of them white. The two women whose pictures are prominently featured on the event’s website are moderators.
Last year this organization had a similarly all-male line-up. This motivated two female PhD students to write a letter to the organizers stating that “a platform that proposes to present progressive views on our future lacks speakers from the group that represents half of the world population.” The letter (which can be read here) was signed by almost 400 people inside and outside academia. And while the organizer, Boudewijn Richel, initially replied that there “are hardly any women in economics and philosophy” eventually something did change. When Yanis Varoufakis, one of the event’s main guests, signed the letter and withdrew from the festival, women were hastily added to the program and took part in the discussions via Skype. (A Dutch press release about the 2016 events can be found here)
It’s astounding and very discouraging that the G10 has not learned anything from last year’s mistakes. We cannot, as we did last year, assume that the organizers simply forgot to think about implicit bias or a fair representation of society. We have sent the organizers of the G10 a letter of protest, but since they seem to have disregarded all points of criticism brought up last year, we have chosen also to contact the participants directly. Please consider if you want to contribute to an event that shows no concern for gender equality and diversity. It would be wonderful if you, as invited speakers. could take up the challenge of convincing the G10 of the importance of these topics.
Kind regards,
Anna Blijdenstein, Ph.D. candidate philosophy (University of Amsterdam)
Marieke Krijnen, postdoc (Orient-Institut Beirut)
Laura Karreman Lecturer Media and Culture Studies (Utrecht University), Ph.D. candidate in Art, Music and Theatre Studies (Ghent University)
On behalf of the board of Society for Women in Philosophy (NL):
Anya Topolski, assistant professor in political theory and philosophy (Radboud University, Nijmegen)
Roos van Unen, MA-student Philosophy (Vrije Universiteit)
Joyce Pijnenburg, lecturer in philosophy (independent), Ph.D. candidate (University of Amsterdam)
Ook dit jaar heeft de G10 van de Economie en Filosofie weer te weinig vrouwen uitgenodigd.
Met Anna Blijdenstein, Laura Karreman en Marieke Krijnen stelden we deze protestbrief op.
Dear G10 organisers,
The G10 Festival of Economics & Philosophy, branded as ‘Scouting for the future’, has 17 male speakers and only 1 female speaker. While the website’s homepage includes photographs of two women, they are relegated to the role of moderators. Last year your organization had a similarly all-male line-up. This motivated two female PhD students to write a letter bringing to your attention the importance of gender equality and diversity. The letter was signed by almost 400 people inside and outside academia and, after one of your main guests resigned, led to some changes made in the program.
It is astounding and very discouraging that the G10 has not learned from last year’s mistakes. We are shocked that a platform that purports to present progressive views on our future lacks speakers from the group that represents half of the world population. In addition, 17 of the 18 speakers are white. This shows little comprehension of our society, which is characterized by a diverse reality. A festival like this should be trusted to aim for a more representative depiction of this reality.
We hope that you do not bring against our objections the often-heard excuse that “there were no women to be found.” Anyone who makes the effort to look beyond the “usual suspects” (which indeed often consist of white men, but that is exactly the result of gender inequality), will discover many highly qualified and talented women. You can also always contact experts to ask for recommendations. Society for Women in Philosophy (NL) has over 60 members (who would be happy to assist), as well as a database of female speakers.
While implicit bias inclines us all to associate the word “economist” or “philosopher” with white men, we need to challenge this bias by making sure to have diverse speakers at events such as these.
If gender equality and diversity are a priority for festival organizers, they should be willing to go the extra mile. Specific perspectives of various social groups provide a critical view on the economy and on society in general. Women do not necessarily have a different view or present specific “women issues”. For us, this is about a fair representation of social reality and about countering of implicit gender bias (people are less likely to think of women when they are searching for and selecting speakers). We can only draw the conclusion that in the case of the G10, gender equality and diversity have not been a priority. That being said, your current selection of speakers has led to an unacceptable result.
Since, as organizers of the G10, you seem to have disregarded all points of criticism brought up last year, we cannot, as we did last year, assume that you simply forgot to think about implicit bias or a fair representation of society. We hope you are willing to make the necessary efforts to change the program, so that we do not feel compelled to boycott this event.
Yours sincerely,
Anna Blijdenstein, Ph.D. candidate philosophy (University of Amsterdam)
Marieke Krijnen, postdoc (Orient-Institut Beirut)
Laura Karreman, Lecturer Media and Culture Studies (Utrecht University), Ph.D. candidate in Art, Music and Theatre Studies (Ghent University)
On behalf of the board of Society for Women in Philosophy (NL):
Anya Topolski, assistant professor in political theory and philosophy (Radboud University, Nijmegen)
Roos van Unen, MA-student Philosophy (Vrije Universiteit)
Joyce Pijnenburg, independent lecturer in philosophy, PhD candidate (University of Amsterdam)
Een Winterplan belicht het einde van de vriendschap tussen drie grote denkers: Friedrich Nietzsche, Lou Salomé en Paul Rée. Korte tijd vormden zij een hecht driemanschap. Ze maakten plannen om samen te leven en te werken: ‘een winterplan’. Dit plan ging niet door, maar Paul Rée (Anne Prakke) en Lou Salomé (Lizzy Timmers) leefden nog wel een aantal jaren als vrienden samen in Berlijn.
Voorafgaand aan verschillende voorstellingen vinden inleidende colleges plaats door filosofe en SWIP-lid Dora Timmers: in Den Bosch, Eindhoven, Haarlem, Arnhem en bij OT rotterdam op 6 en op 20 april.
Wij co-organiseren nagesprekken bij de voorstelling. Met vrouwelijke denkers en voornamelijk SWIP-leden. Het volledige sprekersschema is als volgt:
1 april – Joyce Pijnenburg (OT Rotterdam, 16u)
6 april – Desirée Verweij (OT Rotterdam, 20u30)
7 april – Hedwig Gaasterland (OT Rotterdam, 20u30)
9 april – Marthe Kerkwijk (OT Rotterdam, 16u)
11 april – Cris van der Hoek (Frascati, Amsterdam, 20u30)
12 april – Joke Hermsen (Frascati, Amsterdam, 20u30)
13 april – Simone van Saarloos (Frascati, Amsterdam, 20u30)
20 april – Christa Stevens (OT Rotterdam, 20u30)
21 april – Sanne van Driel (OT Rotterdam, 20u30)
22 april – Ferial Saatchi (OT Rotterdam, 16u)
Tijdens deze leesgroep maken we kennis met drie toonaangevende vrouwelijke filosofen van Nigeriaanse afkomst: Sophie Oluwole, Nkiru Uwechia Nzegwu en Oyeronke Oyewumi. Centraal staat de vergelijking tussen het gedachtegoed van deze filosofen en “westers” denken. Alle drie auteurs hebben zich met deze vraag bezig gehouden.
Rooster leesgroep Nigeria en filosofie
Tijd: 14:00-16:00
Plaats: Hoofdgebouw Vrije Universiteit, de Boelelaan 1105, Amsterdam. Het zaalnummer wordt per bijeenkomst per e-mail bekend gemaakt. Inschrijven graag bij l.d.derksen@vu.nl.
De boeken die besproken worden zijn:
Sophie Oluwole, Socrates and Orunmila. Amsterdam, Ten Have, 2017. (bij veel boekhandels in voorraad of binnen een dag te krijgen, kosten circa euro 19,90)
Nkiru Uwechia Nzegwu, Family Matters. New York, State University of New York Press, 2006. (te bestellen, levertijd 4-6 weken, kosten circa euro 33,00)
Oyeronke Oyewumi, The Invention of Women. Minneapolis/London, University of Minnesota Press, 1997 (te bestellen, levertijd 4-6 weken, kosten circa euro 26,00)
Data en te bespreken teksten:
26 jan. Socrates en Orunmila, Deel I, “Socrates en Orunmila”, p. 9-69.
23 febr. Socrates en Orunmila, Deel II, “Afrikaanse filosofie”, 73-168.
23 maart Family Matters, Introduction. “Igbo Family Structure and Feminist Concepts”, p. 1-21, Hoofdstuk 1, “Family Politics. Making Patriarchy in a Patrilineal Society”, p. 23-62.
20 april Family Matters, Hoofdstuk 2, “Legalizing Patriarchy. Sorting Through Customary Laws and Practices”, p. 63-102.
25 mei Family Matters, Hoofdstuk 3, “Customs and Misrepresentations. Widows and Daughters in Inheritance Disputes”. P. 103-156.
22 juni Family Matters, Hoofdstuk 4, “The Conclave: A Dialogic Search for Equality”, p. 157-197.
28 sept. Family Matters, Hoofdstuk 5, “Structures of Equality: In Mono- and Dual-Sex Systems”, p. 199-239 en Conclusion, “Toward a Balanced Society”, p. 241-247.
26 okt. The Invention of Women, Hoofdstuk 1, “Visualizing the Body. Western Theories and African Subjects”, p. 1-30.
23 nov. The Invention of Women Hoofdstuk 2, “(Re)constituting the Cosmology and Sociocultural Institutions of Oyo-Yoruba. Articulating the Yoruba World-Sense”, p. 31-79.
25 jan. The Invention of Women, Hoofdstuk 3, “Making History, Creating Gender. The Invention of Men and Kings in the Writing of the the Oyo Oral Traditions”, p. 80-120.
22 febr. The Invention of Women, Hoofdstuk 4, “Colonizing Bodies and Minds. Gender and Colonialism”, p. 121-156,
29 maart The Invention of Women, Hoofdstuk 5, “The Translation of Cultures”. Engendering Yoruba Language, Orature and World-Sense”, p. 157-179.
Er wordt een slotbijeenkomst georganiseerd gewijd aan Oluwole. Een aantal deskundigen zullen aanwezig zijn en eventueel een film vertoond over het leven van Oluwole. Nadere informatie volgt..
Aanbevolen Literatuur:
Er bestaat een groot aantal inleidingen in Afrikaanse filosofie, bundels met essays over een bepaald onderwerp in Afrikaanse filosofie en boeken over Afrikaanse filosofie door Afrikaanse auteurs. Hierbij een aantal voorbeelden die betrekking hebben op de teksten die in de leesgroep aan de orde komen:
Oyeronke Oyewumi, What gender is motherhood? Changing Yoruba ideals of power, procreation, and identity in the age of modernity. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2016.
Azille Coetzee, African Feminism as Decolonising force. A Philosophical Exploration of the work of Oyeronke Oyewumi. Dissertatie Vrije Universiteit 2017.
Henk Haenen, Afrikaans denken: ontmoeting, dialoog en frictie. Een filosofisch onderzoek. Amsterdam, Buijten en Schipperheijn, 2006.
Heinz Kimmerle, Mazungumzo. Dialogen tussen Afrikaanse en Westerse filosofieën.Amsterdam/Meppel, Boom, 1995.
Met VG Amsterdam organiseren we Vrouwenlogica in Dialoog: vier verdiepingsavonden over de actualiteit van filosofie door vrouwen. Avondbegeleiders zijn Joyce Pijnenburg, Sanne van Driel, Heidi Dorudi en Lie van Schelven. De avonden zijn los te volgen.
