⒈ Equity In Antigone
On the equity Equity In Antigone view, a law prohibiting women from Equity In Antigone surgeons Equity In Antigone coercive because it Equity In Antigone a threat of loss of Equity In Antigone or Terry Vs Ohio Case Study. But businesses do Equity In Antigone violate this right if they refuse to do business with women, pay women less for Equity In Antigone same work, or create a working environment Equity In Antigone is hostile to them because of their sex. These approaches avoid directly judging the substance of the Equity In Antigone women make or the arrangements that Equity In Antigone. Liberal Equity In Antigone must offer only a gradualist approach. Reprinted Equity In Antigone Dostoevskys The Grand Inquisitor —
THE PURPOSE OF THE CHORUS IN SOPHOCLES \
A full accounting of justice in caregiving focuses not only on the fairness of the distribution of caregiving work but also on the needs of individuals who receive care. Some egalitarian-liberal feminist work includes this dual focus. See also the essays in Bhandary and Baehr on caregiving and liberalism. Rawlsian political philosophy provides the framework for the bulk of egalitarian-liberal feminist writing on distributive justice. The focus of much of that writing has been to explore Rawlsian resources for criticizing the role gender has and continues to play in the basic structure of societies like the United States and to lay out what a gender just society might look like.
However, as Nancy Holmstrom writes in a rather different context ,. Holmstrom Nor has much egalitarian-liberal feminist work attended directly to the role race has played and continues to play in the basic structure of societies like the United States but see Bhandary ; and Mills Some egalitarian-liberal feminists who emphasize the importance of political autonomy—that women be co-authors of the conditions under which they live—focus in particular on participation in the processes of democratic self-determination. These processes include both political deliberation in the many arenas of public political discourse and electoral politics.
Some egalitarian-liberal feminists hold that the conditions under which women live lack legitimacy because women are inadequately represented in these processes. For example women have less free time to engage in public deliberation because of the double-burden of paid and unpaid labor; sex stereotyping leads many to think that women especially women from particular ethnic and cultural groups are less capable of leadership than men; the behavior called for in agonistic public deliberation and electoral politics is understood to be masculine; issues of particular interest to women are seen as personal and not political issues; and women lack power in the many institutions like churches, universities, and think tanks that influence political debate.
But when women are underrepresented in these forums and law-making bodies, it is unlikely that the justice of the gender system will become the subject of public conversation or its dismantling a target of legislative action. Some egalitarian-liberal feminists explore ways to escape this vicious circle. Because women are excluded from important forums of public deliberation and electoral politics in complex ways, remedies must address a variety of problems. Justice in the distribution of benefits and burdens in society would go some way towards enabling women to access forums of public debate on equal terms with men Okin While much of this change is cultural, the state has a role to play.
She also argues that the state may use its persuasive power to put traditionally excluded issues, like violence against women or the dilemma of balancing work and family, on the agenda for public deliberation Some suggest that legal mechanisms for including those who have been systematically excluded may be justified as remedies for the unjust disproportionate political power enjoyed by others Phillips 6— Suggested mechanisms include targets or quotas for women and other underrepresented groups on party slates, or proportional representation in elected bodies. There is diversity of opinion, however, among egalitarian-liberal feminists about the justice and efficacy of such mechanisms Rhode ; and Mansbridge John Rawls distinguishes between what he calls comprehensive and political liberal doctrines Rawls This distinction has been of interest to egalitarian-liberal feminist philosophers.
Comprehensive egalitarian-liberal feminisms are grounded in particular moral doctrines. As we have seen, egalitarian-liberal feminists typically claim that some social and institutional arrangements are unjust and that such arrangements should be remedied; some claim that state power is an appropriate tool for such remediation. Comprehensive egalitarian-liberal feminisms ground such claims in particular moral doctrines. Cudd Political liberal feminisms are accounts of how state power may and should be used to feminist ends that are grounded in public political values.
Public political values are not the particular values of any one moral doctrine; they are values that are shared by the many reasonable comprehensive moral doctrines citizens hold Rawls — Advocates of political liberal feminism hold that state power is used justly when supported by values that are endorsable by all reasonable citizens. Among political liberal feminists we may count S. McClain argues that sex equality is a public and constitutional value 60; see also 22—23, 60—62, and 76 which requires state opposition to relations of subordination and domination in the family 62 ; state support for autonomy in intimate matters 22 ; and support for the development of autonomy capacities in children, especially girls The capabilities list, Nussbaum argues, can be shared by citizens holding a wide variety of comprehensive conceptions of the good life, and thus should be able to function as a foundation for a political liberalism Nussbaum b: 76 fn Schouten argues that the political liberal value of reciprocity undergirds state measures to alleviate the gendered division of labor Schouten As Watson puts it,.
Watson Political liberal feminists suggest some advantages of political liberal over comprehensive liberal feminism. According to S. Conclusions that would be quite easy to reach from stronger feminist principles, or other comprehensive principles, are much harder to reach using the sparse … toolbox [of public reason]. Lloyd But if we can reach feminist conclusions on these sparse grounds, they will be much more difficult to reject. Amy Baehr suggests that arguments to feminist ends from public political values can move the political community toward a more reasonable understanding of those values Baehr ; see also Rawls Comprehensive liberal feminists, in turn, worry that the public political values on which feminist political liberalism must rely render the latter insufficiently critical of precisely those hierarchies and forms of disadvantage egalitarian liberal feminism aims to criticize and undermine Abbey ; Baehr ; Chambers 12, —; Enslin ; Hay 34—39; Okin ; see also Munoz-Darde Egalitarian-liberal feminism has been subject to a variety of criticisms.
Addressing some of these criticisms is a focus of some egalitarian-liberal feminist work. Some reject egalitarian-liberal feminism because, they argue, feminist theory must rely on a much more robust feminist ideal of the good life than egalitarian-liberal feminism is able to provide Yuracko ; Jaggar Young Young 37 and the eroticization of domination and subordination MacKinnon ; which are the true linchpins of the gender system. Critics have focused on the role played by ideals in liberal political philosophy, especially in Rawlsian liberalism. Some are concerned that egalitarian-liberal feminist embrace of the ideal of the egalitarian family effectively elevates one particular comprehensive conception of the good life over the many others found in multicultural societies and across the globe Shachar ; for discussion see Okin and Khader Care ethicists also raise a concern about an egalitarian-liberal feminism for which independence and self-sufficiency are central ideals.
They argue that centering such ideals obscures the fact that human beings come into the world dependent upon others and that many are dependent on others throughout their lives; this, in turn, obscures the value of being cared for and the role that caregiving plays in a good society Held , b; Kittay Egalitarian-liberal feminism has been subject to socialist feminist critique. Egalitarian-liberal feminists have not focused a great deal of attention on capitalism. Epstein 30; see also Tomasi In this article the term classical-liberal feminism is used for a family of doctrines that range from libertarian feminist doctrines that endorse very little if any state power to doctrines that endorse more, yet still limited state power, largely unfettered markets, and an expansive understanding of individual rights.
The doctrines in this family share the following. They conceive of freedom as freedom from coercive interference; they hold that women, as well as men, have a right to freedom from coercive interference due to their status as self-owners; and they hold that coercive state power is justified only to the extent necessary to protect the right to freedom from coercive interference. Equity feminists are classical-liberal feminists who hold that, in societies like the United States, the only morally significant source of oppression of women is the state.
Some equity feminists see a nonpolitical role for feminism, helping women to benefit from their freedom by developing beneficial character traits or strategies for success, or navigating among their increasing options. Other equity feminists are socially conservative and argue that, while the state should not enforce them, traditional values function as bulwarks against state power and produce independent and self-restraining citizens.
Cultural libertarian feminists are classical-liberal feminists who hold that the culture of societies like the United States is patriarchal and a significant source of oppression of women. They hold that the patriarchal culture and the state are complementary systems of oppression. Cultural libertarian feminists hold that much of the oppression women suffer today is noncoercive, however, and thus should not be met with state remedies but with a nonviolent movement for feminist social change.
Classical liberalism holds that women and men are self-owners capable of acquiring property rights over things. As such women and men, equally, have the right to freedom from coercive interference with their person and property. Some reject even a limited state, however, holding that nongovernmental means of protecting rights are to be preferred. It implies that women have the right to freedom in intimate, sexual and reproductive matters.
To be sure, classical-liberal feminists hold that the law should not treat women and men differently. But this is because they believe everyone has the same rights, not because they believe women have a right to be treated the same as men. This is clear when we note that, for classical-liberal feminism, equal treatment under unjust law is not justice McElroy a: 3.
Same treatment under the law does not guarantee same outcomes. Wendy McElroy, an equity feminist writes:. McElroy c—see Other Internet Resources. Equity feminists suggest that this has been largely accomplished in countries like the United States. If an individual or group of individuals suffers sustained and systematic denial of their rights, on the equity feminist view, we may call them oppressed. Women were oppressed in the United States during most of its first two centuries; people of African descent were oppressed before the dismantling of Jim Crow laws. While the culture of the United States supported this denial of rights, equity feminists hold that the oppressor was the state McElroy cc—see Other Internet Resources , which refused to recognize and protect the right of women and people of African descent to treatment as self-owners.
When the state recognizes and protects this right of women and Americans of African descent, they are no longer oppressed, even if the culture disadvantages them. If it is, then women are oppressed C. If women are to be described as currently oppressed in societies like the United States, on the equity feminist view, one must show that the state fails to protect women, as a group, from sustained and systematic rights violations. Equity feminists endeavor to refute this claim by showing that the prevalence of violence against women has been exaggerated. For example Rita Simon contests the claim that as many as out of 1, women have been raped.
Katie Roiphe argues that date rape is not a significant threat to women Roiphe Concurring with Roiphe, Cathy Young writes:. Women have also been said to be oppressed because their right to be treated the same as men by employers, educational institutions, and associations has been violated in a sustained and systematic way. That is, some argue, women have been regularly denied the right to equal access to opportunities because they are women. Equity feminists generally hold that no rights are violated when employers, educational institutions, public accommodations or associations discriminate against women. Nonetheless, equity feminists argue that discrimination against women is not a serious problem.
Christina Hoff Sommers concurs, arguing that, rather than failing to provide girls with an education equal to that of boys, our current educational system disproportionately benefits girls Sommers 20—23, But, for some equity feminists, biological differences between the sexes largely explain the sex segregation in the workplace and in family roles still common in countries like the United States Epstein ; Lehrman 5, Other equity feminists think biological sex differences alone do not explain this phenomenon C.
But equity feminists hold that, because women are not legally required, or actually forced in some other way, to choose traditional roles, their choices are not coerced and thus state remedies are inappropriate. On the equity feminist view, a law prohibiting women from becoming surgeons is coercive because it constitutes a threat of loss of liberty or property. But if one is socialized to prefer stay-at-home motherhood, or one discovers that one prefers to stay home with children given the other real options, one may still choose to become a surgeon without risking loss of liberty or property.
In its nonpolitical role, feminism can help women to develop character traits and strategies that will help them benefit from their freedom; and it can help women to navigate personally among their increasing options. Men have typically held title to quite a few traits that women can now put to good use. Lehrman 33; see also Some equity feminists suggest that feminism offers individual women and men the opportunity for freedom from conformity with sex roles Lehrman 6; Taylor 23— Equity feminists recommend strategies for success for women in education and employment as alternatives to state regulation.
Some equity feminists stress that women need not give up their gender difference to benefit from their freedom Lehrman Lehrman quotes Elizabeth Cady Stanton:. Some equity feminists are socially conservative Morse ; Sommers To be sure, equity feminism as described here is a form of classical-liberalism. As such it involves the claim that traditional values should not be imposed on citizens by the state. For example, the state should not tax citizens to support institutions that promote traditional values; nor should the criminal or civil law create incentives for adherence to such values.
But some equity feminists hold that it is best when citizens voluntarily adhere to traditional values. Socially conservative equity feminists do not take the classical liberal theory of the limits of state power to imply endorsement of a libertine cultural ethos. So, for example, while socially conservative equity feminists hold that the state should not force citizens to accept traditional family forms because individuals have a right against such coercive interference , they hold that society should strongly discourage disfavored ways of life and encourage favored ones through noncoercive, nonstate means.
Elizabeth Fox-Genovese is an example of such a political conservative Fox-Genovese ; In contemporary popular political discourse it is often hard to distinguish these two, as they are in political coalition. To appeal to both classical liberal and socially conservative constituencies, on occasion theorists help themselves to a bit of both traditions. Cultural libertarian feminism holds that these institutions reflect the patriarchal nature of society and oppress women. They explain:. Such feminists hold that much of the oppression women currently suffer is noncoercive, however.
Laws against prostitution are coercive—the state can put a violator in jail or force her to pay a fine. But on the cultural libertarian feminist view much of the pressure to conform to gender roles is not coercive. Noncoercive oppression can be resisted, although it is often not easy to do so. Cultural libertarian feminists hold that noncoercive oppression should not be remedied by the state see also Tomasi This oppression should be opposed by a nonviolent movement for feminist social change. Cultural libertarian feminists target the patriarchal culture by, for example, developing in individuals especially women the ability to be independent. This involves enabling individuals to resist authority and think for themselves Presley Cultural libertarian feminists also recommend the development of more deeply consensual relationships and institutions Heckert —see Other Internet Resources , relationships and institutions in which there is an equality of authority Long —see Other Internet Resources.
Equity feminist Wendy McElroy writes:. Classical-liberal feminism requires same treatment of women and men under just law. This means that sex discrimination by the state, for example when the state functions as an employer, is impermissible Block ; Epstein 34; Warnick But classical-liberal feminists oppose laws that prohibit discrimination against women by nonstate actors, for example in employment, education, public accommodations, or associations McElroy b: 22—23; Epstein But businesses do not violate this right if they refuse to do business with women, pay women less for the same work, or create a working environment that is hostile to them because of their sex.
Private educational institutions do not violate this right if they refuse to educate girls or women, offer them an inferior education, or create a learning environment that is hostile to them because of their sex. Business and professional associations do not violate this right if they refuse to admit women as members or make them feel unwelcome because of their sex. Classical-liberal feminism, as described here, clearly implies rejection of the legal prohibition against private discrimination in employment, education, public accommodations, and associations. But in the literature one finds a range of views. Some categorically reject any legal protection against private discrimination Taylor Others accept basic protections such as those afforded in U.
Classical-liberal feminism holds that private businesses, educational institutions, and associations are free to give or withhold preferential treatment to women. But the state may not treat women preferentially because the state must treat citizens the same regardless of sex. Nor may the state require that private businesses, educational institutions, or associations treat women preferentially. Examples of preferential treatment under the law, which classical-liberal feminists oppose, include affirmative action in employment and education Lehrman 25 , comparable worth Paul and advantages for women in the legal treatment of custody and domestic violence Simon While classical-liberal feminists resist state remedies for private discrimination against women, they also hold that such discrimination is not currently a serious problem in countries like the United States.
In addition, they argue,. Much of the classical-liberal feminist literature, especially the equity feminist literature, is written for public policy and popular audiences, so emphasis is on policy implications rather than philosophical justifications. Nonetheless, we find in the literature a variety of justifications, some consequentialist and some non-consequentialist. The most common justification offered in the classical-liberal feminist literature is consequentialist. This argument says that the political arrangements recommended by classical-liberalism, as compared with the alternatives, will provide women with more of what is good for them: for example safety, income and wealth, and options.
Liberalizing guns laws will make women safer Stevens, et al. A variety of non-consequentialist arguments are offered as well. Wendy McElroy grounds her thought in the natural law tradition McElroy b. Some imply a perfectionist justification according to which the perfection of the human being requires being treated as a self-owner Presley Some criticism of classical-liberal feminism addresses the consequentialist argument offered in support of classical-liberal feminism. Following Ashlie Warnick, we can distinguish the claim that particular liberty-restricting policies are bad for women and that some liberty-enhancing policies are good for women from the claim that all liberty-restricting policies harm women, or that a minimal state or no state would be better for women overall Warnick But, as egalitarian-liberal feminists Deborah Rhode and Ann Cudd argue, sex discrimination remains a significant problem Rhode ; Cudd — While different treatment can stigmatize and entrench stereotypes, same treatment can disadvantage women if they are not similarly situated to men—which, arguably, is the case Minow So the larger case—that all liberty-restricting policies harm women, or that a minimal state or no state would be better for women overall—has not been made convincingly Warnick Some criticism addresses non-consequentialist arguments for classical-liberal feminism.
Critics contend that even if we concede the relevant classical-liberal premises—that women and men should be treated in ways they deserve as ends in themselves, or as natural law teaches, or in ways their perfection requires—it does not follow that the state should treat individuals merely as self-owners entitled only to property justly acquired and freedom from coercive interference.
Since classical-liberal feminism rejects such measures, egalitarian-liberal feminism suggests that it fails to treat women as ends in themselves. Also, that treating individuals as ends in themselves means treating them as entitled merely to protection from coercive interference is plausible only if one ignores the fact of human dependency. By the fact of human dependency is meant the fact that all human beings are utterly dependent on the caregiving of others for many years at the start of life, that many come to need the caregiving of others due to temporary or permanent disability later in life, and that many require caregiving when they become infirm at the end of life; and also, that those who provide caregiving for those who cannot care for themselves become dependent on others for support Kittay If human beings are dependent in these ways, then treating them as ends in themselves will, at least for some of the time, mean something other than merely leaving them alone.
Such an assumption makes it impossible to evaluate the justice of the arrangements under which caregiving is given and received and removes from our consideration the nature of obligations to, and entitlements of, members of society who require caregiving to survive and thrive. Some worry that one form of classical liberalism—libertarianism—seriously misunderstands the political relevance of caregiving because it construes one key caregiving arrangement, the parent-child relationship, as one of ownership see Okin 80—85; see also Nozick ; Andersson ; and Jeske Egalitarian-Liberal Feminism 1.
Classical-Liberal Feminism 2. Liberal feminism must offer only a gradualist approach. Hampton Of course, many women choose to enter or remain in relationships in part because of affective benefits; for example women often get satisfaction from satisfying others or fulfilling a duty. As Rawls puts it, the basic structure of society is the way in which the major social institutions distribute fundamental rights and duties and determine the division of advantages from social cooperation. Susan Okin proposes we take seriously both the notion that those behind the veil of ignorance do not know what sex they are and the requirement that the family and the gender system, as basic social institutions, are to be subject to scrutiny.
She tells us that the state should encourage and facilitate the equal sharing by men and women of paid and unpaid work, or productive and reproductive labor. Alstott writes: The egalitarian family is, even in principle, a troubling ideal. Alstott Other egalitarian-liberal feminists have voiced similar concerns. Elizabeth Anderson writes: The plurality of conceptions of the good that are likely to survive in a world in which the state has done all it can be reasonably and justly expected to do will include a host of unreasonable conceptions of the good, some of which may well be patriarchal.
Anderson ; see also — Recent work by egalitarian-liberal feminists Lori Watson and Christie Hartley and Gina Schouten , however, may be understood as responding to these concerns as it aims to establish that some state action to undermine the gendered division of labor and promote egalitarian family life is both reasonable and just. However, as Nancy Holmstrom writes in a rather different context , a feminism concerned only with ending the oppression women based on gender would be a very limited version, far from the emancipatory vision at its core. As Watson puts it, a central task of public reason arguments, in the context of social hierarchy and inequality, is to expose the ways in which background conditions inequalities undermine the necessary conditions for reasonable deliberations among citizens to occur.
Watson Political liberal feminists suggest some advantages of political liberal over comprehensive liberal feminism. Lloyd But if we can reach feminist conclusions on these sparse grounds, they will be much more difficult to reject. Rachel is a native of North Carolina, and currently resides in Vermont where she most recently serves as Community Programs Officer for Vermont Humanities. Rachel Edens is an advocate, activist, educator, and organizer dedicated to promoting equity for under-represented, historically marginalized communities and individuals. Her work focuses on advancing equity across all intersections of identity, educating for civic engagement, and community asset building. For ten years, Rachel has consulted professionally in the areas of social justice education, restorative justice practices, and equity work.
She has worked with the Theatre of War in productions of Antigone in Ferguson, the Jordan Russell Davis Foundation, Solutions Journalism Network, and addresses audiences across the country as a keynote speaker and workshop leader. She is currently pursuing a Ph. The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community.
Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion. Or login with Facebook, Google or Yahoo! Calendar Classifieds Guides.It is common Equity In Antigone argue that the state, educational Equity In Antigone and workplaces Equity In Antigone not assign roles according to sex. Rachel is a native of Air conditioner components Carolina, and currently Equity In Antigone in Equity In Antigone where she most recently serves as Community Programs Officer for Vermont Curiosity In George Orwells 1984 Liberalism is Equity In Antigone family of Equity In Antigone that emphasize the value of freedom and hold that the just state ensures freedom Equity In Antigone individuals.