Feminist Transformations

The Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (SPEP) and I became feminists at the same time; this is hardly a coincidence, as the events of SPEP more than twenty-five years ago shaped my understanding of philosophy, feminism, and myself as a feminist philosopher and activist. I am most grateful to the members of SPEP’s Committee on the Status of Women (CSW) who organized the “Women and Feminist Scholarship in SPEP and Philosophy: Assessing the Past and Imagining the Future” panel and even more grateful to the women and men of SPEP who organized and initiated the changes that helped make SPEP what it is today. The occasion of SPEP’s fiftieth anniversary is a time to both celebrate SPEP’s history and analyze how it has transformed and grown over time; it is also a time for us to take stock and envision what SPEP should and could be in the future. While SPEP and I became feminists at the same time, my own transformation has been more thoroughgoing than that of SPEP. There remain issues that still require our attention, and the best way to honor and recognize the work of those who transformed SPEP into a more gender-equitable and feminist-supportive organization is to continue their work by interrogating the ways that Continental philosophy can become more open to the transformative possibilities of feminist philosophy.

We now often take SPEP for granted as a good place to do feminist philosophy and as a relatively welcoming place for women philosophers, but some of us on the panel and others in the audience remember when this was not the case. And we must credit the formal, institutional changes that were accomplished some twenty-five years ago (and often referred to as “the coup”) for establishing the necessary conditions that made this transformation of SPEP possible. But these were necessary and not sufficient conditions. Changes in attitudes, habits of thinking, and behaviors cannot be legislated as motions or bylaw amendments. Many of these changes have also taken place at SPEP, but there is continued work to be done on this score.

During the CSW panel held in honor of SPEP’s fiftieth anniversary, Nancy Fraser spoke of having a sense that the work that they were doing in democratizing SPEP to be more inclusive and respectful of both women and feminist philosophy was “history making.” I felt that too, and I was honored to share the dais with Nancy Fraser, Nancy Holland, Mary Rawlinson, and Linda Bell; they, together with Iris Marion Young and several other women, were important role models for me. Each fought battles for equality and recognition in her own way, and I learned from them all.

It is therefore important that the Committee on the Status of Women organized a panel on the occasion of SPEP’s fiftieth anniversary to reflect on the status of women at SPEP, past and present. Although we did not read each other’s comments beforehand, we decided that those of us who had been present before, during, and immediately after the formation of SPEP’s CSW more than twenty-five years ago would offer our perspectives on those events. But this panel would have been incomplete if we did not also offer our reflections on the current status of women and feminist philosophy at SPEP. For this reason, I am grateful to Donna-Dale Marcano and Namita Goswami for agreeing to offer their own critical insights.

Let me begin with my account of the formation of the Committee on the Status of Women and related changes that were made to SPEP some twenty-five years ago. I have been a very faithful SPEP attendee since 1984. That was the meeting at Georgia State in Atlanta where SPEP’s CSW was formed. The 1984 business minutes meeting simply read:

A Committee on the Status of Women in the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy was formed. This Committee is an ad hoc advisory committee with the following tasks: (a) expand membership of women in the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy and reach out to former members who...