IJFAB Blog

The Nobel prize-winning Cambridge biochemist Tim Hunt caused uproar this week, with some comments — which he later said were intended self-deprecatingly and humorously — to an audience of scientists, many of them women, on the topic of women in laboratories. The full content of his comments, and his apology, can be found here.

As a result, he brought down a shitload of opprobrium on himself. He has since been required to resign from his honorary (that is, unpaid) position at University College London and, it appears, from a number of other committees too.

There are a number of things I’d like to say about this: for want of time (the northern hemisphere academics amongst us know that this is marking and exam board season), I’m not going to discuss them in detail, but just put them out there. I’ll be interested in any thoughts and responses.

1. Tim Hunts’s comments, if they were intended to be funny, were undoubtedly really, really poorly judged. His later apology (which sounded a bit like “Damn, I shouldn’t have said it in front of journalists”) was not much better.

2. I had very distant contact with him as a PhD student. He struck me then as socially awkward and of a very different generation, but no more so than many of the other guy scientists around (my own supervisor was an exception).

It is best to find a recognized store. cipla sildenafil Former is expensive and latter is commander levitra affordable. Due to the immense popularity of online pharmacies, getting hold of medicines like overnight viagra online has become very easy. So let’s discuss a bit about erectile and dysfunction and what role Tadalafil the principal ingredient in sildenafil buy online .
3. I’m no longer a working scientist myself (though as we say, you can take the girl out of the control group…), but several women scientists whose views I respect have noted that Hunt’s words don’t reflect his actual behaviour over the years, which has been to encourage women scientists informally, as a mentor, and on formal committees.

4. As Athene Donald noted in her blog, this kind of easy target sexism might be just that: an easy target that distracts us from harder ones.

At the end of the week of Huntgate, I found myself writing the following to the Times Higher Educational Supplement, the UK’s foremost academic trade mag:

If a Nobel Prize-winning scientist can be brought down by his poorly judged remarks about women working in the laboratory, why does the Higher Education Academy think it can get away with a recruitment advertisement.[*] in which every one of the 13 academics and students depicted (with the possible exception of an unidentifiable right arm) is male? At least Tim Hunt acknowledged that there *are* women in science.

Discuss.

[*] Published in the Times Higher Educational Supplement.

I was recently giving a paper on Franco-Anglo Feminisms in Canada at panel on Canadian Feminisms at the Hypatia/CSW conference, Exploring Collaborative Contestations and Diversifying Philosophy, at Villanova. A subject that seems little discussed outside Québec and Franco-Canada is the place and the impact of francophone writings. As it sometimes happens, the planets lined up nicely, and the week of my presentation an article appeared in the New Yorker on the impact, or lack of, French Canadian literature. Is this also the case for feminist theories? As a Franco-Ontarian born, but Québec-raised feminist philosopher, who attends feminist conferences mostly in English, I have wondered about the lack of attention to Québec-Franco writings. If English is becoming universal, it has the potential to serve as a common language. This comes at cost, and I worry, especially now that I teach in both languages, that we are losing the richness of minority languages; and French is a minority language in North America. The situation of francophones in North America is complex: we stand as past (and present) colonizers but also as colonized and under threat of extinction. It makes for difficult politics and the role of languages in preserving identity is lived very intensely by Canadian and Québécois French speakers. I believe in cross-linguistic enrichment and my goal here is to plead for increased translation. Of course there is a danger: to translate could have as a consequence less engagement with the original language. For a careful treatment of the perils of translation see Elissa Marder’s article ‘Force and Translation; Or, The Polymorphous Body of Language,’ PhiloSOPHIA, Vol. 3(1), 2013. However, I hope translation will create a curiosity and encourage students to seek the original.

When I teach, I always endeavor to expose students to writings of authors from different traditions. This has meant, for example, that my students in my Éthiques féministes class got to read, in French, articles by Eva Kittay, Annette Baier, Marilyn Friedman as well as Susan Moller Okin. For this I am most grateful to the work of Sandra Laugier, Patricia Paperman, and Pascale Molinière, who got behind the translation of Joan Tronto’s work, which in turn created interest for Anglo-American feminist writings. However, I am at a loss when I teach Feminist Ethics to introduce my students to the writings of Diane Lamoureux, for example. It is not only that writers from different cultures or languages bring a different perspective; it is also that they have a different philosophical background that they draw upon. Continue reading →