Avatars... where are the women?!

@Gracee,

Gracee;134186 wrote:

I was kinda shocked/appauled at how not one of the single default avatars was of a woman!
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
And is it really true these days that women are still not viewed as real thinkers?

No.

Probably they are all men because most of them are historical figures. I don't think people have paid much attention to the default avatar collection.

I don't think mini me and Dr. Evil are viewed as a real thinkers :bigsmile:

@Gracee,

Thanks Gracee and bravo for your perspicacit?, I didn't notice and I'm glad you brought it up.

@Gracee,

Gracee;134186 wrote:

I was kinda shocked/appauled at how not one of the single default avatars was of a woman!
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
And is it really true these days that women are still not viewed as real thinkers?

In regards to the avatars, it could be that more men are on here than women. I'm almost positive about that, actually.

Who told you women aren't real thinkers? Perhaps there are more known men thinkers than women thinkers (as evidenced here), but that does not mean that women don't have the same capacity to think. What it may point to is that some women never got the spotlight they deserved because they were discriminated against. But, there's lots of known 20th century female philosophers like Susan Haack and Ayn Rand to read, and I think overall people are more accepting of women as thinkers - as things ought to be.

@Gracee,

Gracee;134186 wrote:

I was kinda shocked/appauled at how not one of the single default avatars was of a woman!
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
And is it really true these days that women are still not viewed as real thinkers?

As far as the avatars go, that is a very good point. I've been on here for more than a year and never really thought to look at the default avatar pictures and whether or not women were actually in them. Here are a few avatars for consideration; Hypatia of Alexandria, Betty Friedan, and Mary Wollstonecraft.

As far as women still not being viewed as real thinkers, I am inclined to agree that women are not equally placed in the same consideration as men. The legal disparity is closing, but the conceptual disparity is still very much a problem. But speaking from the academic atmosphere, I think that the inequality gap between men and women in the same field (such as philosophy) has greatly reduced in the last twenty and even fifty years. But outside the academic atmosphere, the disparity widens, which I think is in large part to the uncommon acquaintance of women in that particular field and the common (and very much ingrained) negative connotations men have in large part attached to women doing the same job. Women, to borrow from feminist mantra, have to try twice as hard to be considered half as good as men? which is obviously a crock of donkey dung.

Which is why I in large part support feministic ideals and notions, even the more radicalized ones. The theory goes that there has to be a drastically outlying radical movement to bring the point of equilibrium into play. Take the writings of Betty Friedan for example. She described the domestic placement of women in home as, and I quote from her book A Feminine Mystique, a "? comfortable concentration camp." Extreme but somewhat understandable. But you have many more radicalized views, from a feminine language, unique laws, etc. Not that they should be adopted in any way, but just to show the spectrum of grievances of a long oppressed sex. It is a tone that has long been adopted in the African American Existentialist dilemma, in manners such as hyper visibility, where in order to be truly "seen" by a society, one must be twice as open, expressive, etc. Same thing applies to women's rights and common perception.

@Gracee,

There are not a whole lot of women in philosophy because they are too busy trying to keep men from fighting and killing each other.

(This was meant as a joke, if you are offended, remember, it's just a joke.)

@Gracee,

This might be interesting (particularly the final section, Bringing It All back Home):
Epilogue from The Passion of the Western Mind

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;134194 wrote:

In regards to the avatars, it could be that more men are on here than women. I'm almost positive about that, actually.
...

But that does not explain the total absence of female avatars among the pre-defined avatars. Indeed, given the pre-defined avatars, one might get the impression that women are not welcome here, as they appear to be regarded as so insignificant that not even one female avatar is provided. In other words, it may be a cause, rather than an effect.

I think this should be changed, which is why I have posted in the Site Feedback and Suggestions section.

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;134603 wrote:

But that does not explain the total absence of female avatars among the pre-defined avatars. Indeed, given the pre-defined avatars, one might get the impression that women are not welcome here, as they appear to be regarded as so insignificant that not even one female avatar is provided. In other words, it may be a cause, rather than an effect.

I think this should be changed, which is why I have posted in the Site Feedback and Suggestions section.

And I agree with your decision.

I can tell you now, though, nothing will be changed any time soon. Robert is busy with other projects at the moment, and we won't see changes to the site until probably another month from now. And this, I think, includes even little things like adding avatars (unless you have the capacity to do so, jgweed).

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;134606 wrote:

And I agree with your decision.

I can tell you now, though, nothing will be changed any time soon. Robert is busy with other projects at the moment, and we won't see changes to the site until probably another month from now. And this, I think, includes even little things like adding avatars (unless you have the capacity to do so, jgweed).

Yes, I understand that, and do not have any unreasonable expectations that such changes will be made immediately. But I do think that it should be done before any other "cosmetic" change is made, and before minor alterations are done, as I do think it sends a very bad message to exclude women from the pre-defined avatars.

@Pyrrho,

Pyrrho;134621 wrote:

Yes, I understand that, and do not have any unreasonable expectations that such changes will be made immediately. But I do think that it should be done before any other "cosmetic" change is made, and before minor alterations are done, as I do think it sends a very bad message to exclude women from the pre-defined avatars.

Well, I'm not even sure the new site will support avatars. I'm pretty sure titles will be hidden (like "Moderator"). We shall see.

@Gracee,

Gracee;134186 wrote:

I was kinda shocked/appauled at how not one of the single default avatars was of a woman!
Has anyone else noticed this or is it just me?
And is it really true these days that women are still not viewed as real thinkers?

I typed a whole lot but lost my text. I think you should find your atavars in a different field. I gave examples of female warriors.

I concluded with Libert?, Egalit? et Fraternit? !:whistling:

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;134623 wrote:

Well, I'm not even sure the new site will support avatars. I'm pretty sure titles will be hidden (like "Moderator"). We shall see.

That would be fine. No avatars does not convey a message of excluding women.

As things are, I turned off the viewing of avatars for my own use, as I got tired of seeing the same pictures over and over.

@Pyrrho,

I tried to change my atavar but can't find the right way to do so.

@Pepijn Sweep,

Zetherin;134194 wrote:

Who told you women aren't real thinkers? Perhaps there are more known men thinkers than women thinkers (as evidenced here), but that does not mean that women don't have the same capacity to think. .

Well thats my point! I have never been told women aren't real thinkers, and if i was the person who told me would probably get a slap in the face! What i meant was are we still, in this day and age, subscribing to the belief that women have no place in disciplines such as philosophy... which i would hope we are not, however, the lack of female avatars did make me question that!

Krumple;134209 wrote:

There are not a whole lot of women in philosophy because they are too busy trying to keep men from fighting and killing each other.

(This was meant as a joke, if you are offended, remember, it's just a joke.)

haha thank you, but don't worry, i know a joke when i see one!

Pyrrho;134603 wrote:

I think this should be changed, which is why I have posted in the Site Feedback and Suggestions section.

Thank you very much, maybe the rest of this thread should be devoted to suggestions for female avatars??

@Gracee,

Gracee wrote:

Well thats my point! I have never been told women aren't real thinkers, and if i was the person who told me would probably get a slap in the face! What i meant was are we still, in this day and age, subscribing to the belief that women have no place in disciplines such as philosophy... which i would hope we are not, however, the lack of female avatars did make me question that!

I know what it looks like, but there really is no intended discrimination. The man who started this site wasn't even a philosopher himself, and I imagine just picked a few known philosophers he had heard of as avatars. No reasonable person believes women should be discriminated against in respect to these sorts of disciplines. In fact, I think many of us become excited when a female joins the site, because we don't have that many, and we're often not exposed to female points of views.

I do apologize though, because I know how it looks. Unfortunately, there's nothing I personally can do about the situation currently.

@Gracee,

I think an atavar is showing a threat from your personality. In Spanish they use it for making up an appearence.

The fact there are no "female" atavars available doesn't mean you can not become inspired by Sophia & Hermes.:shifty:

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;134666 wrote:

I know what it looks like, but there really is no intended discrimination. The man who started this site wasn't even a philosopher himself, and I imagine just picked a few known philosophers he had heard of as avatars. No reasonable person believes women should be discriminated against in respect to these sorts of disciplines. In fact, I think many of us become excited when a female joins the site, because we don't have that many, and we're often not exposed to female points of views.

I do apologize though, because I know how it looks. Unfortunately, there's nothing I personally can do about the situation currently.

I'm sorry, i really wasn't accusing anyone of discrimination, i only pointed it out out of pure interest, I was simply wondering if when the topic of philosophy or great minds comes up, people instinctively think of men rather than women.

But i'm glad my female input will be appreciated Smile

i'm inclined to think most of what i have to say isn't very appreciable on many other levels!

@Gracee,

My first thought was how academia does not think of Ayn Rand as a philosopher. (Stop that booing and hissing!)....but now I'm off to find an avatar of Jean-Paul Sartre's girlfriend....

Being a woman I can say things like that right?

Lost1

@Gracee,

Hello Gracee, and a gracious welcome to this predominantly male domain. It is that way because it is we who screwed everything up and it is our onus to fix it. Part of our err is in the little regard we have had toward woman's so very vital role in all this and not giving her the respect she most assuredly deserves. As far a avatars, Betty Boop is around here somewhere. Have you met Caroline yet? She is not one of us males but it is indeed a pleasure to have her around and hear what she has to offer as I am sure it will be with you. Perhaps you can help her in keeping us "calmed" down, ha! She does an excellent job of doing that btw.

William

Philosophy Forum

Avatars... where are the women?!

Quick Links

My Account

able2know