Nina asked:

Are women always associated with passivity in philosophy? I have checked your previous questions
page and there are questions on why there are few women philosophers but not on their role in
philosophy.

============

I don't know where women are associated with passivity in philosophy. In feminist ethics, women are
described as loving, nurturing and supportive. This is the ideal of woman as mother, but it isn't
necessarily passive, since part of the mother's role is to be protective, a concept not especially
associated with passivity. If the ideal of woman is based on her sexual nature, rather than on her role
as mother, passivity might come from the nature of woman as receiving.

There is such a thing as feminist metaphysics, which you might be interested in. My feeling was that
passivity based on sexuality can have very little to do with metaphysics, so I was driven by your
question to find out a bit about it and it turns out that women are and always have been oppressed
and subordinated, which might be what you mean. Because there have been so few women
philosophers in the history of the subject, philosophical concepts and theories have been shaped and
dominated by men. This means that fear of rape and unwanted pregnancies have had little impact on
epistemology, or our consciousness of ourselves. Hence feminist theorists, who are normally
characterised as "active" rather than passive, seek to redress the balance. A woman's role in
philosophy is to approach metaphysics and epistemology from a non-gender-oriented stance so that
our theories of knowledge and the world can be freed from male-biased ways of thinking. However,
given the long history of suppression and gender-determination by society, which is basically by men,
it is unclear whether women are yet able to think properly and because all our social and
philosophical concepts have been developed by men there will be a struggle to be understood.

The role of women who are not feminists is the same as that of men.

Rachel Browne

I'm having a hard time understanding your question. "Associated" how? What do you mean by
"passivity"? Usually, passivity means a lack of action; a passive person is one who either does not act
or one who just reacts to things without initiating actions themselves. Now, how does this relate to
women as "associated" with philosophy? Do you mean women philosophers? Well, they're definitely
not passive. Women, as written about by philosophers? It's certainly true that when some, indeed
most, male philosophers from cultures which regard (or have regarded) women as inferior or the
"weaker" sex have written about women, they have portrayed women in that manner. And some (few)
haven't. If that's what you mean by "associated" with passivity, you're pretty much right. Until the last,
roughly, 50—75 years or so, until women have been allowed, and been educated that they can, start
participating more in academia, they have not, by and large, been taken seriously as philosophers.

Lately, however, this is not true. There are now many women philosophers, some quite well-known,
for example, Martha Nussbaum, to just pick a name out of the air. So as far as that goes, what one
finds is that philosophers do not, by and large (with some exceptions), succeed in overcoming their
various personal and cultural biases. Sad but true. And I'm talking quite generally about any gender
(since we're talking about gender, but you can use any category you want) of philosophers here, just
pick your biases to fit.

As for their "role" in philosophy, again, I'm not sure I understand your question. Women philosophers
are just philosophers, concerned, usually, with the issues that any philosopher is concerned with.
They teach, write, edit journals, and so forth. However, perhaps you are referring to a number of
women (and some men) who are attempting to create a field termed "gender studies". This field, as
far as I can tell (and I'm no expert) seems to be a blend of philosophical and sociological issues
involving various interactions between men and women, varying in its emphasis from "pure"
philosophy to "pure" sociology (scare quotes because no one can really define what "pure" anything
is). If you want to know more about it, just do a web search for "gender studies".

Steven Ravett Brown