Philosopher Women... Where are they?

[Ichthus]

hm. lol.

P.S. mags has my vote!

[Contra-Nietzsche]

Kant and Orgasm shouldn't be mentioned in the same line.

This is cart before the horse or man before the dick. Men have to plan for the great orgasm.

Yeah, I suppose if your fucking a cart you gotta plan in advance, but another person? Naw..... comes naturally, doesn't it? Bend her over, grab her hips, and then... well, some men manage it here even without penetration.

Now a horse hooked up to a backwards cart is gonna take some planning. Gotta watch than kick, and the cart's gonna hold it in place, so it can only back up. It's not like in New Zealand where the farmers do it to the sheep on the cliff so they back into them, a horse has alot of mass and at the very least One Horsepower ramming backwards, if not more since your violating it. You gotta bring a friend to hold him down.

http://www.break.com/usercontent/2007/7 ... ent-325722

That stuff happened all the time. Try being on a stakeout spying on a guy, only to discover this stuff is happening..... but your required to watch incase the guerrilla leader shows up for the meeting intel told you about. You don't wanna look, but you can't turn away.

Yeah..... so this is women in philosophy? The orgasm and the backwards wagon and horse and planning? Shit yeah.
Women, you outta be ashamed of yourself. Equating everything to backwards horse wagon sex resulting in a planned climax. How does this stuff even get in your head.

[Stoic Guardian]

Kant...orgasm....

I get it.

[lizbethrose]

[outside], Women here are held to higher standards than are men. Our thoughts are questioned, our 'mettle' is challenged, we're ignored, demeaned, and verbally raped and sodomized. Our 'sensibilities' are attacked with sexual, male-oriented, language and innuendo. That happens any time a woman joins what men consider to be "their world." It can be really silly when it's taken too far, of course, but it happens, at times, in both the real world and the virtual. Women often have to 'run the gauntlet.' I get the idea, at times, that even a woman with a Doctorate in Cognitive Philosophy holding tenure at a highly respected Western university would go through the same 'initiation rite,' here--if she makes it known, only, that she is a woman.

But that isn't true for all the men here, there are some good guys--although they'll often treat you with ignore-ance. And there will be times when you'll be happy about that, if their responses have become too closed-minded and/or demeaning. If that happens, give a mental 'meh' and go on. You might be surprised to find the same men who've ignored you take some of your points and use them as their own.

Welcome to the wonderful world of male-domination--in their dreams.

[James S Saint]

[outside], Women here are held to higher standards than are men.

Consider that it might be a case of your perception of their "male" standards has merely been much lower than they actually are. So when you jump into the ring, you get hit in ways that you didn't expect. Of course, then you presume that it is only because you were a female. When the real matter is merely that you see what you see because you are a female and then don't get what you expect because you were not seeing what was there.. until you got hit by it.

In your case, Liz, you have a very simple fix that would allow your obvious talents to raise much higher on the forums than they have. But you insist on staying the way you have apparently always been and thus unwilling to adopt to a higher field of play.

It isn't that women can't do it, nor that they are oppressed, but merely that they want what they want and that just happens to not fit well in the world of philosophy (as well as a few other sports).


...but then you might want to note that I am very seldom impressed with even male philosophers.

[Polly]

I think that if philosophy continues to align with the scientific method and becomes less fusty and obscure, women's interest in it may deepen.

As a woman, I need a discipline to have some sort of practical aspect in order for it to interest me. Take determinism, for example: determinism, fundamentally, ties together the scientific fact of causality with a whole host of psychological factors which I can apply or observe in my own life.

The closer the philosophy to real world interpretations and the more it can and does apply in reality, the more interesting it is.

[[Outside]]

[outside], You might be surprised to find the same men who've ignored you take some of your points and use them as their own.
Welcome to the wonderful world of male-domination--in their dreams.

I love that and will be a new quote
of mine.
Lol, Thank you, makes me feel proud to know
even through all of that even as a woman
I know I can come out on top.

So when you jump into the ring, you get hit in ways that you didn't expect.

This is why, I love the male species because when a woman steps into a ring they hold nothing back.
You ask for equal rights and they will give you this plus everything they comes with it. If
this is what it takes to become accepted into the world of philosophy then so be it.
Nothing will keep me from what I love.

[Polly]

Male philosophers, also, aren't the most attractive demographic, generally favouring an unwashed and sort of "new romantics" look. Women think about this stuff when they pick college courses.

[Flannel Jesus]

oh lizbeth, you so silly. you assume that if people don't respect your ideas, it's because you're a woman.

it's kinda like how certain black people think everything negative that happens to them has to be racist. White teacher gave me an F on my essay assignment? That's racist! A television show doesn't portray enough nobel-prize winning black people? That's racist! Something happens that I don't like?

For lizbeth, "That's sexist!" is the mantra.

There are males on this site I take less seriously than you, lizbeth. Turtle, for example. Hell, you might even have a hair of an advantage over Quetzlcoatl. Saying that your ideas are dismissed because I'm sexist...that's too easy. That's how you avoid the life-shattering thought, "Maybe my ideas are just bad."

If a girl gets on the basketball court and finds that, after a few plays, the guys stop passing her the ball, she may assume it's because they're sexist -- anybody watching knows it's because she misses every time.

[Pandora]

Women are practical creatures. They live in-the-physical-world, not in the world of abstract "daydreams".
(the sense is that many philosophers are in business of creating imaginary problems only to come up with imaginary solutions - i.e. in the end, they don't really achieve/do anything). To women, most philosophers live in la-la land, i.e. they sit in their rooms and pick their nose all day.
To many women, critical thinking and problem solving (which are grounded in the immediate world) are superior to abstract 'philosophy' because it is more useful and applicable to the real world. (that's why an average woman would pick an engineer over a philosopher)

[James S Saint]

I think that if philosophy continues to align with the scientific method and becomes less fusty and obscure, women's interest in it may deepen.

As a woman, I need a discipline to have some sort of practical aspect in order for it to interest me. Take determinism, for example: determinism, fundamentally, ties together the scientific fact of causality with a whole host of psychological factors which I can apply or observe in my own life.

The closer the philosophy to real world interpretations and the more it can and does apply in reality, the more interesting it is.

I can agree with that.
But notice that you stated of what is "interest to me".

Lol, Thank you, makes me feel proud to know
even through all of that even as a woman
I know I can come out on top.

It also helps to forget that you are a woman or that they are males (I hesitate using the term "men" in reference to most males).

So when you jump into the ring, you get hit in ways that you didn't expect.

This is why, I love the male species because when a woman steps into a ring they hold nothing back.
You ask for equal rights and they will give you this plus everything they comes with it. If
this is what it takes to become accepted into the world of philosophy then so be it.
Nothing will keep me from what I love.

Actually outside [the box], if you care to indulge in a personal experiment, I can show you where women are when it comes to philosophy.

Remember I stated earlier;
The Philosopher is not someone who merely comes up with questions for which there are no reasonable answers, but rather someone who comes up with answers for which there are no reasonable questions.

So merely answer each of the following questions with answers that cannot be reasonably questioned, answers that you know to be absolutely correct.
Starting with the following;
1) What is the make of the universe?

[[Outside]]

hat's how you avoid the life-shattering thought, "Maybe my ideas are just bad."
If a girl gets on the basketball court and finds that, after a few plays, the guys stop passing her the ball, she may assume it's because they're sexist -- anybody watching knows it's because she misses every time.

What makes anyone ideas better then another?
So instead of helping her out or telling her straight
out,"You need a bit more practice," these males rather
ignore her?
I didn't fail 1000 times. The light bulb was an invention with 1000 steps.” ~~ Thomas Edison.

[lizbethrose]

[outside], Women here are held to higher standards than are men.

Consider that it might be a case of your perception of their "male" standards has merely been much lower than they actually are. So when you jump into the ring, you get hit in ways that you didn't expect. Of course, then you presume that it is only because you were a female. When the real matter is merely that you see what you see because you are a female and then don't get what you expect because you were not seeing what was there.. until you got hit by it.

In your case, Liz, you have a very simple fix that would allow your obvious talents to raise much higher on the forums than they have. But you insist on staying the way you have apparently always been and thus unwilling to adopt to a higher field of play.

It isn't that women can't do it, nor that they are oppressed, but merely that they want what they want and that just happens to not fit well in the world of philosophy (as well as a few other sports).


...but then you might want to note that I am very seldom impressed with even male philosophers.

What is that 'higher field of play,' JSS?--citing dead philosophers' words? You know I can't do that--I'm a philosopher, not a parrot!

I've tried for the last 5 or more minutes to get the following posted. It's obviously some hitch in the programs git-along, so I'm trying this route:

Male philosophers, also, aren't the most attractive demographic, generally favouring an unwashed and sort of "new romantics" look. Women think about this stuff when they pick college courses.

LOL! Really--that did make me laugh! I never thought of it that way, Polly.

FJ, I don't assume that at all--that's your mantra about me. I respect my ideas, as do other people both here and in the real world--male and female. I believe there are people who don't understand my ideas, so they make fun of them--or ignore them. Oftentimes, I've found they've incorporated some of those ideas in their own later responses. That means one of two things to me: either I'm correct in my thinking or my thinking is such an established truth it doesn't need to be repeated. Either way, my thoughts are affirmed.

[Contra-Nietzsche]

I do help women out, and it's not always the most promising ones in a generic sense when it comes to learning philosophy. They remind me of my younger sister. I take extra time figuring out what they need.

And I note that most of the comments on this page have nothing to do with male or female characteristics, but personality. If we accept Polly's position, then Darwin, Rousseau, and Polyani was gay. I can go on to point out the inconsistency in every other post, but I won't..... as it's clear that their labeling personality traits that can be traced to the opposite sex.

In the mean time, we have made up hurt feelings on the female side to explain why their underperforming. The anwser is bloody simple, I already outlined it. They get sidetracked with babies, and men, though they are effected, are generally allowed by women to continue. Women just don't for the most part save in their Loy Luck Club isolation stuff, chatting about crap most men wouldn't bother with. Take dream interpretation and alchemy and astrology...... it's the only place where women break 50-50 with the men, and the men are all squirrely recluses or fantastically gay in it, outside the odd psychologist who finds himself clearly lost and mistaken for showing up.

It's a simple answer of biology. It's not shameful, makes a lot of sense, and does show women begin to get back into the swing of things. No need to blame males sodomizing you as to why your under represented in the philosophy circle.... a little anal never stopped Foucault or Wittgenstein.

[Polly]

It must suck quite a bit for guys to continuously hear women bleating on about the inherent sexism of the universe.

[Flannel Jesus]

What makes anyone ideas better then another?

I'm sure you can come up with some criteria for that yourself.

Some basic ones are logical consistency and empirical evidence.

And yeah, we ignore her. The whole trying-to-help-her-learn approach doesn't really work -- in regards to the determinism debate, Volchok can testify to this fact - no matter how many times he, as a determinist (so he should know), corrected her on what determinism actually entails, she comes back time and time again and makes the same mistakes. There's a certain point when you realize that you've just gotta give up on someone. They just don't get it.

[[Outside]]

The Philosopher is not someone who merely comes up with questions for which there are no reasonable answers, but rather someone who comes up with answers for which there are no reasonable questions.
So merely answer each of the following questions with answers that cannot be reasonably questioned, answers that you know to be absolutely correct.
Starting with the following;
1) What is the make of the universe?

You can't base my opinions for all women just as I wouldn't base all opinions from one male.
I am still young and learning in philosophy. If I know one thing is I know nothing at all.
However, if you want me to indulge I can.

Also, I notice I must be a thorn in most people sides because
Faut calls me Outie and you just stated outside [the box].
Lol, I find it cute tho but not in a rude way.

It must suck quite a bit for guys to continuously hear women bleating on about the inherent sexism of the universe.

Lmao... I think they call it PMSing

And yeah, we ignore her. The whole trying-to-help-her-learn approach doesn't really work -- in regards to the determinism debate, Volchok can testify to this fact - no matter how many times he, as a determinist (so he should know), corrected her on what determinism actually entails, she comes back time and time again and makes the same mistakes. There's a certain point when you realize that you've just gotta give up on someone. They just don't get it.

I guess, you right.

[Joe Schmoe]

Women are practical creatures. They live in-the-physical-world, not in the world of abstract "daydreams".
(the sense is that many philosophers are in business of creating imaginary problems only to come up with imaginary solutions - i.e. in the end, they don't really achieve/do anything). To women, most philosophers live in la-la land, i.e. they sit in their rooms and pick their nose all day.
To many women, critical thinking and problem solving (which are grounded in the immediate world) are superior to abstract 'philosophy' because it is more useful and applicable to the real world. (that's why an average woman would pick an engineer over a philosopher)

I'll play.

You described critical thinking and problem solving as being attached to the physical world. This is funny. Read the italic and problems are constructs of the mind.

If you accept that our consciousness is a product of the immediate world, then our theories are grounded in the immediate world. Philosophy could answer why to do something, as opposed to how to do something.

What of any construction without intent?

[James S Saint]

What is that 'higher field of play,' JSS?--citing dead philosophers' words? You know I can't do that--I'm a philosopher, not a parrot!

Have you ever, ever, ever heard me quote dead philosophers?
I have ranted time and again on those who call themselves philosophers but merely preach the dogma of the dead.

Oftentimes, I've found they've incorporated some of those ideas in their own later responses. That means one of two things to me: either I'm correct in my thinking or my thinking is such an established truth it doesn't need to be repeated. Either way, my thoughts are affirmed.

The same happens to me. But do I assume that it is merely because of my gender?
Why do you?
Stop focusing on your gender and it won't be the issue.
The only thing that your gender does to males is inspire them to make an effort to help when you in fact didn't really want their help, or didn't want to be seen accepting it (a really bad and typically male mistake).

[James S Saint]

The Philosopher is not someone who merely comes up with questions for which there are no reasonable answers, but rather someone who comes up with answers for which there are no reasonable questions.
So merely answer each of the following questions with answers that cannot be reasonably questioned, answers that you know to be absolutely correct.
Starting with the following;
1) What is the make of the universe?

You can't base my opinions for all women just as I wouldn't base all opinions from one male.
I am still young and learning in philosophy. If I know one thing is I know nothing at all.
However, if you want me to indulge I can.

I wasn't assessing all women based on your opinions. I was asking for you to go along with an experiment in order to display "where women are" when it comes to philosophy. Don't presume to know where I am heading.

So what is your answer?

[Polly]

But notice that you stated of what is "interest to me".

Well yes; why wouldn't I?

[James S Saint]

But notice that you stated of what is "interest to me".

Well yes; why wouldn't I?

It is very relevant to the question at hand.
How many women do you know that sit at a bar and discuss philosophy with a male... or even another female?

[[Outside]]

So what is your answer?

Sorry, didn't mean to presume.
Well, my answer would be God.
He is the make and soul creator.
I know it isn't the absolutely correct
answer for all but its the one I hold
true.

[Polly]

But notice that you stated of what is "interest to me".

Well yes; why wouldn't I?

It is very relevant to the question at hand.
How many women do you know that sit at a bar and discuss philosophy with a male... or even another female?

i don't know any women or men who do that, except my husband.

[James S Saint]

i don't know any women or men who do that, except my husband.

Well I and those I know would add considerably more. But any discussion that I bring up in the field at such places ends very quickly with her very obvious disinterest. Any such discussions I bring up in more private places ends with me realizing that she hasn't heard a word I have said for the last 10 minutes.