Debate Day

Debate 5A--The Second Sexism--Slides
Debate 5B--Male Privilege--Slides

Study Guide for the final is at the tab above and also at Canvas (on the home page).

Tommy Curry on Black Males

Intersectionality (Kimberle Crenshaw--video), three points:

1. People who are black and female are doubly disadvantaged
• People who are black and male are both disadvantaged and privileged
2. Problems at intersection of black and female can be invisible
3. A mix of features can create advantages/disadvantages that are not associated with either feature

Tommy Curry's critique of intersectionality--

1. In combination with being black, being male creates vulnerability, not privilege
• there is toxic, patriarchal, hegemonic masculinity (white + male)
• there are other masculinities (black + male, brown + male)
2. Black males are actually worse off than black females

Interview with Tommy Curry

• about his book The Man-Not and a NYT study.  (recommended, especially for debaters)
• We'll watch the first 20 minutes (debaters may want to watch the rest). 
• Tone quality gets worse and worse--sorry about that!

Digby vs. Benatar

Today's material is on the whiteboard.  Interested in how Benatar responded to Digby's objections?  See here.

***

Clarifications:

It's not great being a man!
Digby is not saying it's hunky dory being a man. There are lots of disadvantages to being a man (he affirms Benatar's list), and we should make changes. However, men are not victims of sexism or discrimination.

What is sexism or sexist discrimination?
In section 6, Digby says (in so many words):

For X to be a victim of sexist discrimination, all of these conditions must be met:

1. X is treated differently based on sex, but sex is irrelevant to the job, position, resource, or whatever. (This is Benatar's whole definition of sexist discrimination.)  
2. The treatment of X goes beyond the warrior/procreation patterns that are part of our evolution and history.
3. The treatment of X is done by a Y, not an X.
4. The treatment of X involves stigmatizing, devaluing, and disempowering Xs.

Example: It's 1970 and John is subject to the draft, while his equally capable sister Joan is not. Is this sexist discrimination against John?

Diagnosis: condition 1 is met, but not conditions 2-4.  So not sexist discrimination.

Making a "proves too much" objection.  Digby is trying to argue that John is not a victim of sexism or discrimination.  The objection is that his definition is also going to make it very unusual for women to be victims of sexism or discrimination.

In which of these three examples are all four conditions met?

Example 1: Joan voluntarily joins the army and wants to play a combat role, but that's prohibited.  

Example 2: Alice applies for a job but isn't interviewed because she's pregnant and has two other small children. A man with a baby on the way and two small children would be interviewed.

Example 3:  The male leaders of a church hire men as pastors but not women.

The Second Sexism (Benatar)

The Second Sex vs. The Second Sexism

• The second sexism is sexism against men and boys
• David Benatar is a respected South African philosopher
• Online "men's rights movement" (see this movie)
• "So unrecognized is the second sexism that the mere mention of it will appear laughable to some." (Benatar, p. 177)
• Wants it to be recognized, but is he saying "the second sexism" is worse than "the first sexism"?

Defining terms

• SEX, GENDER
• Benatar uses gender terms (man, woman) interchangeably with sex terms (male, female)
• doesn't address distinction between cis males and trans males

• SEXISM
• Ann Cudd and Leslie Jones:
•  "...On our view sexism is a systematic, pervasive, but often subtle, force that maintains the oppression of women...." ("Sexism," p. 158)
• Kate Manne: 
• "sexism should be understood primarily as the 'justificatory' branch of a patriarchal order, which consists in ideology that has the overall function of rationalizing and justifying patriarchal social relations." (Down Girl, p. 79)
• On these views, could there be a second sexism?
• Benatar: 
• sexism = sex discrimination 

• SEX DISCRIMINATION
• Jennifer Saul, Feminism
• dominance discrimination--whole system is set up so men dominate
• difference discrimination--x and y are just alike in all relevant respects, but x is treated better than y, based on sex 
• Benatar:
• "I shall follow the convention of understanding discrimination as the unfair disadvantaging of somebody on the basis of some morally irrelevant feature such as a person's sex." (p. 177)
• direct vs. indirect (example of indirect: the police dept with a height requirement)
• intentional vs. unintentional

• DISADVANTAGE
• non-discriminatory disadvantages
• a non-discriminatory disadvantage of being female is..........
• a non-discriminatory disadvantage of being male is........
• discriminatory disadvantages
• a discriminatory disadvantage of being female is........
• a discriminatory disadvantage of being male is.....(Benatar: unrecognized)

Discriminatory Disadvantages of being male (according to Benatar)

• Are these disadvantages really discriminatory?

1. WAR
• "social legal pressures on men....to fight in war" (p. 178)
• 2019: in the US, women may enter combat, but men must (when there is a draft)
• crewcuts
  
2. VIOLENCE 
• "Men are much more likely to be the targets of aggression and violence." (p.179)
3. SACRIFICE  
• "Women and children first" (e.g. the Titanic)
  
4. CORPORAL PUNISHMENT  
• Boys hit more often than girls
5. SEXUAL ASSAULT
• Not taken seriously when against men.
6. CHILD CUSTODY 
• "fathers fare worse than mothers with regard to child custody" (p. 181)
7. AFFECTION 
• Boys receive less affection from their mothers after divorce (p. 182)
8. GAY MEN 
• More discrimination against them than against lesbians. (p. 182)
9. CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 
• Imposed on men more than women (p. 183)

Why? Underlying attitudes

1. Men's lives valued less than women's
• "women and children first"
• missing women vs. missing men
2. Violence against men accepted
3. Belief that men are "naturally more aggressive, more violent, less caring, and less nurturing than women are"

Objections (that he tries to counter)

1. Not really discriminatory--many of the disadvantages are mere disadvantages
2. Distraction--it's more important to focus on sexism against women and girls
3. Inversion--look closer, and "the second sexism" turns out to be discrimination against women
4. Costs of dominance--problems men have are byproducts of their being dominant

Debate 4

DEBATE 4 SLIDES



 

McKinnon's Arguments

Bicycling article
Hostility and misgendering--National Review
UK Interview after winning world champion in her track cycling event again this month
McKinnon's lecture on fairness and inclusion

• 19:27-22:44 (Rawls)
• 22:44-25:16 (hyperandrogenism)

Coleman's Argument

Should intersex women be able to compete in women's sports?

Yes, but if they are 46XY they must lower their testosterone to 5 nmol/L .

• This is the IAAF/CAS/IOC position
• Argument made by Doriane Lambelet Coleman

1. Women’s sports should be separate from men’s sports for the sake of fairness and equal opportunity for women (among other reasons).
2. The separation should be based on what gives men an advantage-- gonadal sex, not gender or gender identity
3. 46XY intersex women (like Caster Semenya) have male gonadal sex.
4. They can change this by suppressing their testosterone to below 5 nmol/L.
5. Requiring them to do so advances fairness and equal opportunity and has no moral costs that are more important. THEREFORE
6. 46XY intersex women should be able to compete in women’s sports but only if they lower their testosterone to 5 nmol/L.

No, period.

• reject the presupposition of 3, that 46XY intersex women are women--maintain they are simply men
• reject 4--maintain it's too late to change--testosterone has shaped their bodies throughout life

Yes, unconditionally.

• reject #5 --moral costs are invasion of privacy, social disruption, plus collateral damage (impact on all elite female athletes who fear being tested)
• female sports heroes like Caster are inspiring, whatever their gonads
• Could reject other premises, or even all of them (see McKinnon).

----

• Next time: We will look at Rachel McKinnon's arguments
• Who is Rachel McKinnon?
• Bicycling article
• Hostility and misgendering--National Review
• UK Interview after winning world champion in her track cycling event again this month
• She gives a lecture on fairness and inclusion (we will watch excerpts next time)

Intersex and Trans Athletes (Background)

Vocabulary

• intersex
• disorders of sexual development
• differences of sexual development

History of sex-testing (Padawer and other sources)

• 20th century: as women enter sport, there's a fear of male impostors
• 1940s: female competitors had to have gender certificates
• 1966: sex verification used "nude parades" in front of physicians and genital exams
• 1967: changed to chromosomal testing. XX chromosomes required to compete in women's sports. 
• 1985: Martinez-Patino case. XY, PAIS, female-presenting. Spanish hurdler, expelled, lost medals. Later reinstated. 
• IAAF witched to "'manual/visual" check for individuals whose femininity was questioned
• 1990s: if athlete is challenged, then chromosome and hormone testing, plus pelvic exam and psych evaluation

Recent history: Caster Semenya

Caster Semenya

• 2009: Caster Semenya, South Africa, wins world championship in 800 meters
  • legally female, female gender identity
  • didn't know she was intersex
  • she was challenged, gender-tested, suspended pending results
  • 2010: she is reinstated 
• 2011: International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) decides that if challenged, female athletes must be legally female and testosterone level must be below 10 nmol/L 

Fertilitypedia

• exception: athlete is insensitive to testosterone 
• can reduce with drugs or surgical removal of internal testes
• 2012: Semenya won Olympic gold medal in women's 800 meters

Watch first 13 minutes:

Recent History: Dutee Chand

• 2014: Indian runner Dutee Chand dropped from several competitions due to "hyperandrogenism" (high testosterone in a female). 

• legally female, female gender identity
• didn't know she was intersex
• discovered after she was challenged at a competition
• 2015: Chand appeals to Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
• CAS suspends testosterone testing, giving IAAF time to defend.
• 2016: Caster Semenya wins Olympic gold medal in 800 meters
• 2018: IAAF defends and upholds testosterone testing for intersex and trans athletes
• female athletes must have testosterone under 5 nmol/L (unless athlete is insensitive to testosterone)
• only for middle distance (400 meters to a mile) running events, 
• must sustain lower level for 6 months prior to competition (chemically or surgically)
• affects international competition only
• alternatively these athletes can compete in men's events
• "in no way intended as any kind of judgment on, or questioning of, the sex or the gender identity of any athlete" (a question of eligibility, not gender)
• 2019: After another challenge, IAAF upholds 2018 policy. 
• clarifications here
• they say: applies to those intersex women who are both XY and legally women (e.g. Caster Semenya)
• applies only to high level international competition
• also applies to trans women, who must be legally female
• 2019: decision challenged and suspended pending review by Swiss Supreme Court

Watch first 14 minutes:

at July 14, 2019 No comments: 

Trans athletes

Chris Mosier, triathlete

Fallon Fox, mixed martial arts

Rachel (Veronica) McKinnon,
masters cycling gold medalist
and philosophy professor

The debate about intersex athletes: positions

1. There should be testosterone limits for intersex female athletes (Monday: Doriane Coleman, she argues the lower limit is best)
2. They should be unconditionally eligible
3. They should be unconditionally ineligible

The debate about trans athletes: positions

1. There should be testosterone limits for trans women athletes 
2. They should be unconditionally eligible (Wednesday: Rachel McKinnon)
3. They should be unconditionally ineligible

To what extent are the ethical issues in these two debates distinct?

Debate 3

Question: Should trans people be able to serve in the US military just like cis people?

Yes, based on equality and equal capacities--Rowan, Kat
No, it would be wrong for them to be allowed to serve.--John, KeAndre

SLIDES

The US Debate

Debate 1: Trans advocates vs. Gender Critical Feminists in UK

• GCFs allege conflicts of interest between trans women and cis women
• don't want to share spaces and resources whose purpose (on their view) is to protect and advance cis women

Debate 2: Trans advocates vs. Conservatives in the US

US Background

1. Sex, race, religion, are explicitly stated protected categories in federal anti-discrimination laws (affecting employment, education, housing, the military, etc.) but not gender identity or sexual orientation. 
2. The Equality Act, passed in the House May 2019, would add gender identity and sexual orientation as protected categories (not passed by Senate)
3. The Supreme Court is considering whether gender identity is already logically implicit in existing anti-discrimination law. 
4. President Obama interpreted federal prohibitions on sex discrimination so they were applicable to trans people in the areas of education, employment, healthcare, housing, and the military. New rules and policies were issued.
5. President Trump has been withdrawing these Obama-era protections (details here). We will focus on: military ban, healthcare.
6. On a state level: 28 states prohibit some forms of discrimination against trans people
7. On a city level, there are more protections:  city ordinances.

Healthcare 

• Why does Trump administration want to roll back protection from discrimination in health care? What conservative arguments are made to support the roll back?

• Alleged: a conflict of interest between religious providers and trans patients
• Example of such conflict: Dr. Rod Story vs. patients of Dr. Geoff Stiller

• Are there conservative philosophers making a religious liberty argument? 
• Political scientist at conservative think tank: Ryan T. Anderson

Religious Liberty Argument 

1. We are all entitled to religious liberty.
2. Religious liberty must include the freedom to avoid involvement with medical gender transitions.
3. Anti-discrimination laws protecting trans patients would inevitably limit the religious liberty of these providers.   
4. The providers' interest in religious liberty takes priority.  THEREFORE,
5. There shouldn't be anti-discrimination laws protecting trans patients.

Premise 1--discuss

Premise 2--discuss

Premise 3

• Title VII protects against discrimination in employment based on religion. 
• There are other laws that give religious providers a right of refusal.  Relevant info here and here.
• Could there be anti-discrimination laws but also religious exemptions? 

Premise 4, consider in light of:

• Peter Singer--Principle of equal consideration of interests
• John Rawls--veil of ignorance
• Martha Nussbaum--all capabilities (and individuals) matter

Military Ban

• sympathetic portraits of 4 trans military members in Guardian article
• Ryan T. Anderson argument

Trans advocates vs. Gender Critical Feminists

Gender Recognition Act (2004)--legal sex/gender change requires application to panel, evidence of gender dysphoria, 2 years of living as a woman (or man), medical records
Proposed reform--legal sex/gender change based on self-identification
2017-2018--consultation


KATHLEEN STOCK VS. 
LORNA FINLAYSON, KATHARINE JENKINS, ROSIE WORSDALE (FJW)

We will watch the first 4:30 minutes




Stock's argument

1. There are separate spaces (e.g. shelters, prisons) and resources (e.g. prizes, short lists) for women in order to protect biological females from males and overcome their disadvantages relative to males.
2. Transwomen* are biologically male.
3. Since they are biologically male, transwomen pose the same risks as cis males and have had the same advantages as cis males.
4. Because of the risks and advantages, allowing transwomen to access women’s spaces and resources would defeat the purpose of these spaces and resources.
5. With self-ID, there will be more biological males (both sincere transwomen and impostors) in women’s spaces. THEREFORE,
6. Self-ID should be rejected.

* She writes "transwomen" not "trans woman." Why do you think she does that?

FJW have objections to each premise.

1. Get into debate groups
2. Discuss the premise that corresponds to your group
3. What do FJW say about that premise?
4. Find a good passage to read, to back up your intepretation of FJW
5. Who is more convincing about that premise, FJW or Stock?

What do FJW say about each premise?

PREMISE 2--in some sense true 

p. 8

PREMISE 3--probably false

p. 9

PREMISE 4--false
Even if there were extra risks, that wouldn't defeat the purpose of these spaces.  The spaces are for women (see discussion of premise 1) and trans women would still be a subset of women.

p. 11

PREMISE 5--false
No evidence of impostors

PREMISE 1--false
The purpose of spaces is not to serve the needs of biological females but to serve the needs of all women

p. 11-12

Debate 2

Is it an injustice that women and men fare differently in the workplace?

Affirmative

Yes, it is an injustice--it's due to dominance discrimination, restrictive gender roles, and implicit bias. 

Negative

No, it is not an injustice--it's due to differences in women's choices, interests, and talents.

ACT I

AC-5

NR-6

AC-1

ACT II

NC-5

AR-6

NC-1

Slides

Implicit Bias and Stereotype Threat

Dominance discrimination seems to explain a lot about women in the academic workplace (see last post), but doesn't answer these questions:

1. Why do single childless women do somewhat worse compared to married fathers?
2. Why are there far fewer women in STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Math) subjects?
3. Why are there far fewer female philosophers (Jennifer Saul's article)?  

4. Why is there attrition--women start out taking philosophy courses but stop?

What is the answer to those questions?

1. Men and women make different choices, have different interests (Christina Hoff Sommers)
2. Mary Ann Mason: stereotype threat and implicit bias
3. Jennifer Saul, explaining why so few women in philosophy: stereotype threat and implicit bias

Stereotype threat

Cheryan et al (2009)

• "concerns ways that a person’s (awareness of their) own group membership may negatively affect their performance" (Saul, p. 2)
• "if you ask five to seven year old girls to colour in drawings of girls holding dolls before taking a maths test, their performance is significantly reduced (Steele 170)" (Saul, p. 5)
• more examples of stereotype threat from Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine:
• STEM majors were shown videos of male-dominated and gender-balanced conferences; women had a stress reaction to the male-dominated scene and expressed less interest in attending (Murphy et al 2007)
• men and women were asked about their interest in computer science careers in geeky room (star trek posters etc.) and ungeeky room (art posters etc.) Women expressed more interest in joining a web-design company if asked in the ungeeky room (Cheryan et al 2009)
• men and women were shown ads depicting women excited about making brownies or worrying about their appearance; afterwards women more likely to avoid math problems on a test; less likely to express interest in technical careers; less interested in leading a group (Davies et al 2002)
• Saul argues: women get cues that they don't belong in philosophy
• the conference room with pictures of male philosophers
• the all male syllabus

Implicit Bias

• "unconscious biases that affect the way we perceive, evaluate, or interact with people from the groups that our biases 'target'" (Saul, p. 2)
• Hypothesis: implicit bias excludes women from male dominated fields like STEM and philosophy
• The resume study (Saul, p. 4)
• But wait, do I really have implicit bias against ___________?

The IAT and the debate about what it shows

• The Implicit Association Test (IAT)
• What was your test about? How did it work?
• gender-career test 

The debate

• Bartlett, "Can We Really Measure Implicit Bias? Maybe Not"
• Hart Blanton, University of Connecticut psychologist
• Performance on IAT doesn't predict behavior
• Changes in performance don't lead to changes in behavior
• People perform differently from one moment to the next
• Payne et al "How to Think about 'Implicit Bias'"
• Just because IAT is a poor test, doesn't mean there isn't implicit bias

• The email study, in more detail 
• The debate about implicit bias among philosophers (see comments as well)

The Academic Workplace

Dominance discrimination

1. Difference discrimination occurs when workers who are alike in all their qualifications are treated differently because of sex.
2. Dominance discrimination occurs when (1) jobs are designed for men as the default worker, and (2) this results in men actually doing better and dominating
3. Other problems in workplaces: misogyny, sexism, sexual harassment, implicit bias, stereotype threat, etc. (last two on Monday)
4. Christina Hoff Sommers says most disparities are due to (1) choices and (2) differences in interests and talents.

The academic workplace

As you watch the video, consider which of the above explanations is most applicable to specific disparities.

We will watch 5:32-19, 2:21-26, using this worksheet

What would be an effective and just solution to dominance discrimination?

Abolish gender roles.  (Jennifer Saul, Susan Okin--argument based on Rawls)

• Need to do so, to equalize the prospects of academic men (who now often have caregiving wives) and academic women (who are now often primary caregivers)
• What would it take to abolish gender roles? Is it going to happen? Is it desirable?

Redesign the workplace (Saul's suggestions)

• part time work
• part-timers should be able to advance
• free childcare
• shorter workweeks
• no mandatory overtime
• equal parental leave for men and women

• Would this be fair to all stakeholders?
• Is gender neutral parental leave good for women?  This article calls that into question.
• Saul says non-parents should be able to use the same options to pursue their outside interests. Marathon-training leave?  

Extend Title VII to dominance discrimination so employers can be sued if they don't redesign the workplace.

• Saul doesn't discuss this, but is it a good idea? 

Possible debate questions

1. Should Title VII prohibit dominance discrimination?  
• Yes 
• No, that would be unfair because________
2. Can dominance discrimination be ended without abolishing gender roles? 
• Yes, it can be ended by ________
•  No, we must abolish gender roles
3. Are Saul's workplace solutions fair to everyone?
• Yes
• No, they're unfair to ________________

Women in the Workplace

Some Data

The Gender Pay Gap

The Gender Leadership Gap

The Mom/Dad Gap

Question: injustice or choices?

Are these differences due to injustices like sexism, misogyny, harassment, discrimination, and bias, or are they due to differences and choices?

Christina Hoff Sommers--retired philosopher, internet provocateur, has a You Tube series called The Factual Feminist

Jennifer Saul--philosopher, author of Feminism:Issues and Arguments

1. Today--Saul's argument about discrimination
2. Friday--case study -- discrimination against mothers in Academia--is it discrimination?
3. Monday--Saul on implicit bias plus counterarguments

What is discrimination?

1. In the abstract, as a moral matter, a question of justice
2. In a specific country like the US, as defined by Title VII, other laws, precedents, Supreme Court cases, etc. 

• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964--prohibits employers from discriminating against any individual because of the individual’s "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin"

The difference model of discrimination

• basic idea: like cases should be treated alike
• It's discriminatory when

1. x and y are just alike as far are their credentials go, but
2. x is treated differently than y because of x's sex, and
3. sex is irrelevant to the job (not a "BFOQ")

• Note--it doesn't have to be intentional, conscious, deliberate, or hostile
• Which of these are examples of discrimination under the difference model?

1. Mary and Bob have similar records of achievement at a law firm but Bob is paid more.*
2. Mary is hired as an RA at a women's dorm, not Bob.
3. Women are rarely hired by a police dept because there's a 5'9" height requirement
4. Very few women ever become managers at Walmart because most are primary caregivers and tend to reject overtime and revolving schedules (example of Caroline from The Working Poor, by David Shippler, published in 2005)

• Title VII?

The dominance model of discrimination

• basic idea: it's discriminatory for a workplace to be structured by the assumption that "the standard worker" is a non-primary-caregiver (usually a man ), not a primary caregiver (usually women).
• on this view, Walmart was discriminating against Caroline
• Note--again, it doesn't have to be intentional, conscious, deliberate, or hostile
• read p. 12-13
• what does she say to the idea that people like Caroline are making choices, so there's no injustice? (p. 15)

What should be done?

1. Put an end to gender roles--women not trained to be primary caregivers; men not trained to be providers
2. Redesign the workplace so "the standard worker" is assumed to be a caregiver

In a just society, there will be no gender roles

• Susan Okin, applying Rawls
• We're in the original position, behind the veil of ignorance (we don't know our sex)
• We would know that gender roles are disadvantageous to women
• We would choose a society without gender roles as a matter of justice
• Saul argues that (a) we have't already abolished gender roles, and (b) it's possible to do so, because they are taught, not innate
• Other views: Aristotle, Patricia Churchland on the brain

Redesign the workplace so the "standard worker" is assumed to be a caregiver