Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T14:10:53.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gender and the “Great Man”: Recovering Philosophy's “Wives of the Canon”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Jennifer Forestal Open the ORCID record for Jennifer Forestal [Opens in a new window]  and
Menaka Philips Open the ORCID record for Menaka Philips [Opens in a new window]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Cluster on Gender and the “Great Man”: Recovering Philosophy's “Wives of the Canon”
Information
Hypatia , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , Fall 2018 , pp. 587 - 592
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Collins, Patricia Hill. 2008. Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dion, Michelle L., Sumner, Jane Lawrence, and McLaughlin Mitchell, Sara. 2018. Gendered citation patterns across political science and social science methodology fields. Political Analysis Forthcoming. https://doi.org/10.7910/dvn/r7aqt1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duke Unversity. 2018. Project Vox. Project Vox. 2018. https://projectvox.org/philosophers/.Google Scholar
Elmes, John. 2017. Study finds women in economics write papers that are more readable, but face longer publication delays. Inside Higher Ed, April 20. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/04/20/study-finds-women-economics-write-papers-are-more-readable-face-longer-publication.Google Scholar
Hengel, Erin. 2017. “Publishing while female.” Cambridge Working Papers on Economics, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
hooks, bell. 1991. Theory as liberatory practice. Yale Journal of Law & Feminism 4 (1). http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjlf/vol4/iss1/2.Google Scholar
Jaschik, Scott. 2010. The new poli sci collaboration. Inside Higher Ed, February 25. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/02/25/polisci.Google Scholar
Rossiter, Margaret W. 1993. The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science 23 (2): 325–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazanec, Cecilia. 2017. #ThanksForTyping spotlights unnamed women in literary acknowledgments. NPR.org. March 30. https://www.npr.org/2017/03/30/521931310/-thanksfortyping-spotlights-unnamed-women-in-literary-acknowledgements.Google Scholar
Teele, Dawn Langan, and Thelen, Kathleen. 2017. Gender in the journals: Publication patterns in political science. PS. Political Science & Politics 50 (2): 433–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waithe, M. E., ed. 1995. A history of women philosophers: Contemporary women philosophers, 1900–today. Dordecht: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar