New APPS

14 responses to “A Petition to the APA through its Board of Officers”

1. 

   Karl

   March 7, 2014

   Way to go being inclusive. In a time when a good number of us APA members don’t have jobs at all, remind everyone that we only want a supportive environment for “fellow faculty members and students.”

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Becko Copenhaver

   March 7, 2014

   Thanks for this, those who drafted the petition. I have signed. I hope that those who sign who are willing to volunteer to serve on the committees who would do this important work, indicate so in in the comment box. I would be willing.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Lisa Shapiro

   March 7, 2014

   I signed before reading Becko’s comment. I would also agree to serve on such a committee.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   Robin James

   March 7, 2014

   I’m worried that this sort of solution is a carceral feminism that will only further disadvantage already disadvantaged members of the field. There’s a pretty good discussion of the problem with the “more police” solution (as Leigh Johnson put it) over on my Facebook page, which you can find here: https://www.facebook.com/robin.james/posts/10100885393526291?comment_id=10375084&offset=0&total_comments=14&notif_t=share_comment
   The tl;dr of that FB discussion is this: “protect women” solutions usually instrumentalize women as an excuse for one group of men to regulate and marginalize another group of men (e.g., as Spivak puts it, “white men saving brown women from brown men”). This code of conduct strikes me as a “protect women” solution. I would prefer instead an “end patriarchy” solution that’s not focused on policing but on dismantling institutional mechanisms that reinforce and reward sexism.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Michael B

   March 7, 2014

   “a code of conduct and a statement of professional ethics for the academic discipline of philosophy.”
   The First Commandment: ‘thou shalt not covet thy student’s ass’, perhaps?

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. 

   LK McPherson

   March 7, 2014

   While I appreciate the spirit of your concern, I doubt that the racialized “carceral” dynamic Spivak refers to is relevant in the context of the philosophy profession. There simply are not enough colored men around to “protect” an even smaller number of colored women from. (Also, presumably, these few men realize they’re far less likely to get away with harassing or boorish gendered behavior.) Colored men in philosophy are already marginalized, or absent, to an extent that the prospect of “further disadvantage” is almost hard to imagine.
   So the growing momentum for not only a protect but also promote women solution to philosophy’s “climate” problems will hardly make a difference to the circumstances of men of color. That said, I would like to see a change to the annoying, partly redundant convention of vaguely tacking on “and minorities” to statements whose de facto focus is white women. If a purpose of these statements was to provide meaningful acknowledgment of racialized minorities, that’s not working at this point.
   In short, there is on the philosophy profession’s horizon no mechanism whereby improving the status of women would come at the general expense of racialized minorities–which is a good thing, as far as it goes.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   Roberta L. Millstein

   March 7, 2014

   Helen, are you thinking that the code would spell out possible consequences for violations?

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   Becko Copenhaver

   March 8, 2014

   Robin,
   I am very sympathetic with the problem you raise about these kinds of codes of conduct. I think that there is more than ample empirical evidence that such codes tend to be instituted in nothing but good faith in institutions that are quite imperfect and end up getting applied to the very marginalized groups that the folks who had the good faith wanted to do right by wanted to protect, but then the folks who advocated for those bright ideas are somehow…missing and gone.
   That’s why when I signed this I asked for people to be willing to serve on the very APA committee for which they were calling. Since you have raised a very legitimate reason for not signing, I would also ask you to be willing to serve on such a committee. I think your voice and perspective would mean a great deal.
   In this light, I would draw attention to Roberta’s comment below: she asks “are you thinking that the code would spell out possible consequences for violations?” I did not sign thinking that, for reasons that I will assume (if you allow) that I think you share. I want our statement to be a mere expression of what we expect of ourselves, primarily as teachers and a only secondarily as philosophers, and certainly not as cops.
   I think it’s fair to say that you are free to be a philosopher independent of a professional obligation to teach, and if you do that, you can do what you want. But if you freely consent to a position that requires teaching, I think that it is fair to make it fully clear that we as a community expect the tremendous sacrifice that we not sleep with an infinitesimally small proportion of the human population for an infinitesimally small amount of time. I think we can handle that without too much trouble, right? I’m pretty sure we can pull it off.
   My ultimate hope is that we can come together as a community and talk openly and honestly about where we are at and where we can go,

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. 

   Helen De Cruz

   March 8, 2014

   Roberta: Eleonore and I deliberately refrained from providing content or format of the code. I’m not an expert on this matter, and it should be handled separately. Speaking for myself, I think the code should be a positive document that empowers people to make clear decisions when they come in a department where the situation is not very good, or to become active, rather than passive bystanders.

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. 

    Helen De Cruz

    March 8, 2014

    Robin: As you can see, we refrained from proposing any content for the code, of course, how it is put in practice depends on the members of our profession. I certainly don’t think a code like this would be a “more police” solution. Rather, I think it would help faculty see more clearly what is to be done in various situations. Of course, our individual institutions have already codes of conduct, but these are very variable. Oxford has some policies on harassment, but very little else, for example.
    When I was at the Oxford meeting with grad students in light of recent events, several faculty members expressed a strong desire for a code of conduct, for instance, (this was the sense there), to actively discourage amorous student-staff relationships. Unfortunately, the faculty (unlike the individual colleges) cannot enforce its own policies. At the university level, there are very few guidelines. So this is an instance where a code is welcome.
    Also, hypothetically, suppose one is in a situation like sketched in the Boulder site visit report. A code could empower faculty members and students who are in a program like this, often arriving in a situation that already has a lot of undesirable but entrenched features (e.g., where late night drinking is an essential part of the faculty’s having contact). With the help of a clear guidance of a code, faculty members and students would have it easier to remedy the situation – recognizing there’s a problem is often the first step toward the solution.
    Finally, while there is obviously a gendered dimension to the events portrayed, we did not mention a gendered agenda for the code (in fact, we provided no suggestions for content). Speaking for myself, I hope the code would be broader than being aimed at improving the climate for women. There are also issues like racism and cissexism, for instance, to be addressed.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    Mohan Matthen

    March 8, 2014

    According to the statement by Amy Ferrer, Executive Director of the APA, posted at your change.org website, the APA defers to the AAUP code of ethics. That code of ethics says, regarding students: “[Professors] avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students.” Given your comment 10, you have something considerably more specific in mind. For example, a stipulation that late night drinking should not be required for faculty contact. I know you say that you don’t think of yourself as expert in these sorts of matters, but is this the level of specificity you have in mind? Or do you have in mind that a principle regarding respect and abuse would be formulated.

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Roberta L. Millstein

    March 8, 2014

    Fair enough. I am not an expert on these matters myself, and so I don’t know whether it is typical for such codes to suggest consequences.

    LikeLike

    Reply
13. 

    Helen De Cruz

    March 8, 2014

    Dear Mohan: I am, as I said, not an expert (I gave the example of late night drinking because it came up in two of the recent case). But indeed, it’s my personal view (and also Eleonore’s if I do not misinterpret her) that it needs to be more specific, and to address the concerns specific to our profession (Eric had a recent blogpost on how the drinking culture seems well engrained in philosophy). But I would rather leave specific suggestions for content to the people who would draft the code.

    LikeLike

    Reply
14. 

    Gordon

    March 9, 2014

    I think there’s a couple of general issues that should be settled at the outset. Codes of conduct in the professions more generally do two things, as far as I can tell. First, they give people cover for refusing to do something their boss wants but that are clearly unethical. Second, they give a way to enforce good behavioral norms. Assuming we could sort out a consensus on what those norms are (and I expect that beyond the obvious low-hanging fruit, that’s going to be difficult), I’m still a little unsure what the code could achieve – the worry is that it would be like laws in Plato, where good people don’t need them and bad people ignore them. The problem is that for those other professions, there’s independent licensing bodies such that code violations can cause you to lose your license, and losing your license makes it illegal/impossible to practice the trade. I’m not sure I see an analogue here, but without that stick, I’m not sure how the code would do either of two things it does elsewhere, especially the 2nd (which I take it is more urgent here). It would certainly have signaling value for the profession and for the APA, but I’m not sure how to translate that.
    Do other organizations (ex. MLA) have such a code? That might be instructive, and since philosophy seems to be about a generation behind all the other humanities on really basic equity issues, groups like the MLA might very well have relatable experience… surely (to continue with the example), late night drinking isn’t specific to philosophy?

    LikeLike

    Reply