Sara, Those views I had echoed in my posts were not ones I held, but their being espoused by some folks I knew did make me hesitant. As for the therapy sessions, they gave me an opportunity to talk, openly and freely, and sometimes analytically--the importance of which, in coming to grips with my many anxieties and insecurities, and in dealing with not-yet-processed grief, cannot be understated. There was obviously a great deal of personal archaeology but I never felt any of it was irrelevant in dealing with my preoccupations then. I went twice a week, and often, my sessions did fire-fighting, dealing with some current crisis. But in exploring why I had the reactions I did, I learned a great deal about myself--knowledge which stood me in good stead later. It is an indulgent experience but that's precisely as it should be--you get a chance to work through long-standing problems with a listener who is sympathetic and hopefully, a partner in this process of change.

Dear John, Your substantive points are all good ones, and I accept them. In my follow-up, I had sought to establish the existence of a pattern of silencing by providing some autobiographical detail. This still only paints a partial picture of what I think is an active marginalization--to modern academic philosophy's loss--of many valuable philosophical traditions.

Jennifer, Thanks for this very rich comment--especially with all the references you've provided. Much appreciated. There are issues here of attribution that I hope to address in another post very soon. best, Samir

Dear John, I did not name Wesley in my original post. I made clear my issue is not with particular individuals but with attitudes, of which I took his quoted remark to be an instance of because of its content and phrasing and timing--as I pointed out. You see his comment as a 'correction'; I see it as a 'clarification'. Perhaps we could have an extended debate--linguistic analysis at its best!--about when a clarification is actually a correction. But if you prefer 'correction' so be it--as your emphatic italicizing of the word suggests, you are very invested in this interpretation of Wesley's comment. I welcome the correction, then. I don't know what kind of scoreboard of injustices rendered and sustained you maintain, but feel free to make an entry that reads 'Wesley - 1; Samir - 0'. Feel free too, to make this about particular individuals and to ignore the larger issue I'm raising. But perhaps you will only be assuaged by some form of groveling apology from someone who clearly seems to have an irrational chip on his shoulder. And with that tendered, we can all get on with business as usual.