Gender Inequality Theories of Feminism

This chapter discusses liberal feminism, divided into liberal feminism and libertarian feminism. The liberal variant of liberal feminism sees freedom as personal autonomy and political autonomy. The exercise of personal autonomy depends on some enabling conditions that are insufficiently present in women's lives and other elements of women's flourishing. Autonomy deficits like these are due to the patriarchal nature of inherited traditions and institutions, and that the women's movement should work to identify and remedy them. Liberal feminists believe that the state should be the women's movement's ally in promoting women's autonomy. The libertarian variant of feminism sees freedom as freedom from coercive interference. It believes that both women and men have a right to such freedom due to their status as self-owners. Coercive state power is justified only to the extent necessary to protect the right to freedom from coercive interference. Feminism's political role is to bring an end not only to laws that limit women's liberty but also to laws that grant special privileges to women.

Author(s):  
Donna R. Gabaccia

Because the United States celebrates itself as a beacon of liberty, emancipation is one of the most common themes in the history of immigrant women and the exploitation of women, as workers or as wives, tends to be traced to the patriarchy of foreign communities or immigrant men rather than to unequal American gender relations. At least since the colonial era, opportunities for immigrant women from Europe to expand their own sense of personal autonomy and agency have surpassed opportunities for immigrant women from Asia, Latin America, Africa, or the Caribbean. Gender inequality for immigrant women is less the result of confrontations between differing immigrant and American forms of patriarchy and more the product of gendered forms of American racism.


Author(s):  
Anne Phillips

No one wants to be treated like an object, regarded as an item of property, or put up for sale. Yet many people frame personal autonomy in terms of self-ownership, representing themselves as property owners with the right to do as they wish with their bodies. Others do not use the language of property, but are similarly insistent on the rights of free individuals to decide for themselves whether to engage in commercial transactions for sex, reproduction, or organ sales. Drawing on analyses of rape, surrogacy, and markets in human organs, this book challenges notions of freedom based on ownership of our bodies and argues against the normalization of markets in bodily services and parts. The book explores the risks associated with metaphors of property and the reasons why the commodification of the body remains problematic. The book asks what is wrong with thinking of oneself as the owner of one's body? What is wrong with making our bodies available for rent or sale? What, if anything, is the difference between markets in sex, reproduction, or human body parts, and the other markets we commonly applaud? The book contends that body markets occupy the outer edges of a continuum that is, in some way, a feature of all labor markets. But it also emphasizes that we all have bodies, and considers the implications of this otherwise banal fact for equality. Bodies remind us of shared vulnerability, alerting us to the common experience of living as embodied beings in the same world. Examining the complex issue of body exceptionalism, the book demonstrates that treating the body as property makes human equality harder to comprehend.


1961 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 581-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffrey L. Goodwin

Charting the course of attitudes in Britain toward the United Nations is mainly a matter of defining small gradations within a fairly limited range, a range varying from sympathetic concern—and ritualistic commendation—at one end of the spectrum to barely dis uised indifference at the other. Among a small section of radical public opinion the Organization can still (August 1961) arouse fervent support, while the right-wing Beaverbrook press and its sympathizers lose few opportunities of pointing out its deficiencies. Nevertheless, during most of its fifteen years' existence, so far as public interest in Britain in its political activities is concerned, the limited impact the United Nations has had on most of the major issues of peace and war has discouraged “popular opinion” from waxing very enthusiastic-or bitter-about it; indeed, although a generally accepted part of international life, it has for long periods languished relatively unnoticed in a diplomatic backwater. Only at such moments of crisis as Korea, Suez, or the Congo, when the Organization has been forced into the mainstream of international politics has this rather tepid reaction been punctuated by heightened tension—and acrimony.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 776-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blain Neufeld

AbstractJohn Rawls claims that public reasoning is the reasoning of ‘equal citizens who as a corporate body impose rules on one another backed by sanctions of state power’. Drawing upon an amended version of Michael Bratman’s theory of shared intentions, I flesh out this claim by developing the ‘civic people’ account of public reason. Citizens realize ‘full’ political autonomy as members of a civic people. Full political autonomy, though, cannot be realised by citizens in societies governed by a ‘constrained proceduralist’ account of democratic self-government, or the ‘convergence’ account of public justification formulated recently by Gerald Gaus and Kevin Vallier.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 88
Author(s):  
Mohammad Agus Yusoff ◽  
Athambawa Sarjoon ◽  
Abd Rashid Abdul Wahab

Positioning minority concerns within a power-sharing mechanism is a key issue that has been influential in Sri Lanka’s modern state-building process experimented from the later part of the colonial period. Throughout the post-independent era, most state-building projects were critically debated with regard to sharing political autonomy between the majority Sinhalese and the minorities. This study attempts to locate the claims and concerns of minorities seeking political autonomy in Sri Lanka’s state-building and power-sharing discourse. The study found that the state-building process in Sri Lanka has always been a struggle between establishing a majoritarian-ethno-nationalist hegemonic state system and preserving the right of minority ethnic groups to political power-sharing. The study further found that (a) insufficient emphasis given towards understanding power-sharing and federalism as a means to accommodate diverse interests and rights, including the political autonomy rights of minorities, (b) the opportunistic politics of opposition parties, and (c) the ethno-nationalist agenda of the majority Sinhalese were the major factors that have induced to undermine the minorities’ claims for political autonomy. The ultimate result of this is the continuous struggles by minorities to situate their political autonomy demands within Sri Lanka’s state-building and power-sharing discourse.


2012 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Marshall

AbstractAlthough rare, giving birth in secret or in concealed circumstances still happens in the United Kingdom. The new born child's existence is unknown to his or her biological ‘father’ and or to the wider biological family of the birth giver who wishes to place the child for adoption without his or her existence being revealed to them. Legal decisions need to be made judicially when a local authority seeks orders as to whether it is required to make further inquiries to identify and notify the biological father and or wider biological family as to any forthcoming adoption proceedings. Developments in European human rights law's protection of a right to respect one's private life provided by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) towards a right to personal autonomy, identity and integrity can be interpreted in different ways. However, three positions are argued here to guard against an erosion of women's confidentiality and privacy in these circumstances. First, women's choices of concealment should be accepted with respect rather than perceived as inauthentic and therefore impermissible; this is in keeping with Article 2's right to life and Article 8's right to personal autonomy and integrity. Second, the right to family life protected by Article 8 of any wider biological family and father is not contravened by allowing women to give birth discreetly. Third, openness and transparency, when it comes to exact knowledge of one's parents in this context is not necessary for a child's identity rights, which are also protected by Article 8's right to personal identity, to be legally protected.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 78
Author(s):  
Dardan Vuniqi

State is society’s need for the existence of an organized power, equipped with the right equipments of coercion and able to run the society, by imposing the choices that seem reasonable to them, through legal norms. State is an organization of state power; it is an organized power which imposes its will to all the society and has a whole mechanism to execute this will. The state realizes its functions through power, which is a mechanism to accomplish its relevant functions. The power’s concept is a social concept, which can be understood only as a relation between two subjects, between two wills. Power is the ability to impose an order, a rule and other’s behavior in case that he doesn’t apply voluntary the relevant norm, respectively the right. Using state power is related to creation and application, respectively the implementation of law. To understand state power better, we have to start from its overall character. So, we notice that in practice we encounter different kinds of powers: the family’s one, the school’s one, the health’s one, the religion’s, culture’s etc. The notion of powers can be understood as a report between two subjects, two wills. Power is an order for other’s behavior. Every power is some kind of liability, dependence from others. In the legal aspect, supremacy of state presents the constitutive – legislative form upon the powers that follow after it. Supremacy, respectively the prevalence, is stronger upon other powers in its territory. For example we take the highest state body, the parliament as a legislative body, where all other powers that come after it, like the executive and court’s one, are dependable on state’s central power. We can’t avoid the carriage of state’s sovereignty in the competences of different international organizations. Republic, based on ratified agreements for certain cases can overstep state’s power on international organizations. The people legitimate power and its bodies, by giving their votes for a mandate of governance (people’s verdict). It is true that we understand people’s sovereignty only as a quality of people, where with the word people we understand the entirety of citizens that live in a state. The sovereignty’s case actualizes especially to prove people’s right for self-determination until the disconnection that can be seen as national – state sovereignty. National sovereignty is the right of a nation for self-determination. Sovereignty’s cease happens when the monopoly of physical strength ceases as well, and this monopoly is won by another organization. A state can be ceased with the voluntary union of two or more states in a mutual state, or a state can be ceased from a federative state, where federal units win their independence. In this context we have to do with former USSR’s units, separated in some independent states, like Czechoslovakia unit that was separated in two independent states: in Czech Republic and Slovakia. Former Yugoslavia was separated from eight federal units, today from these federal units seven of them have won their independence and their international recognition, and the Republic of Kosovo is one amongst them. Every state power’s activity has legal effect inside the borders of a certain territory and inside this territory the people come under the relevant state’s power. Territorial expansion of state power is three dimensional. The first dimension includes the land inside a state’s borders, the second dimension includes the airspace upon the land and the third dimension includes water space. The airspace upon inside territorial waters is also a power upon people and the power is not universal, meaning that it doesn’t include all mankind. State territory is the space that’s under state’s sovereignty. It is an essential element for its existence. According to the author Juaraj Andrassy, state territory lies in land and water space inside the borders, land and water under this space and the air upon it. Coastal waters and air are considered as parts that belong to land area, because in every case they share her destiny. Exceptionally, according to the international right or international treaties, it is possible that in one certain state’s territory another state’s power can be used. In this case we have to do with the extraterritoriality of state power. The state extraterritoriality’s institute is connected to the concept of another state’s territory, where we have to do with diplomatic representatives of a foreign country, where in the buildings of these diplomatic representatives, the power of the current state is not used. These buildings, according to the international right, the diplomatic right, have territorial immunity and the relevant host state bodies don’t have any power. Regarding to inviolability, respectively within this case, we have two groups to mention: the real immunity and the personal immunity, which are connected with the extraterritoriality’s institute. Key words: Independence, Sovereignty, Preponderance, Prevalence, Territorial Expansion.


2019 ◽  
pp. 1371-1388
Author(s):  
Ladislaus M. Semali

This chapter investigates the story of Jitahidi women in Tanzania to understand the dynamics of empowerment at the grassroots level. The stories chronicled in this chapter present self-reliance events, motivations, and practical initiatives of a small entrepreneurial group of women, organized with shoe-string budgets. Their goal was to establish a women's collective strength that could unleash women's lives from oppressive economic regimes, patriarchal traditions, gender inequality, gender discrimination, and socio-historical legacies that exploit women everywhere. The study revealed that dialogical way of thinking and underlying conventions wrapped-up in Women in Development activities in Tanzania were critical in providing the vision that guided the Jitahidi group to create a space for transformation and potential to empower women so as to define their own educational needs and create political organizations within the local community.


2021 ◽  
pp. 224-251
Author(s):  
Howard Davis

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. It discusses European Convention law and relates it to domestic law under the HRA. Questions, discussion points, and thinking points help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress and knowledge can be tested by self-test questions and exam questions at the chapter end. This chapter discusses Article 5 the right to liberty. This is liberty in its classic sense, addressing the physical liberty of a person (as opposed to broader concepts of liberty, such as the sense of personal autonomy and the lack of individual or social subordination). Article 5 deals with restrictions of liberty like arrest and detention by the police, imprisonment after conviction, detention of the mentally ill in hospitals, and the detention of foreigners in the context of immigration and asylum. It defines and restricts the purposes for which a person can be deprived of his or her liberty and, importantly, requires that people have access to judicial supervision so that the lawfulness of any deprivation of liberty can be examined and, if necessary, remedied. The overriding guarantee of Article 5 is the right not to be detained in an arbitrary manner.


Author(s):  
Christian Kreuder-Sonnen

Chapter 3 develops a proportionality theory of IO emergency powers to account for the variable outcomes of normalization (ratchets) and containment (rollbacks). It posits that IO exceptionalism creates distributional consequences at the level of political autonomy that are positive for the governors and negative for the governed. Since IO authority is dependent on its general recognition by the rule-addressees, the states and supranational actors in authority need to be able to justify their measures as proportionate, or else the delegitimation attempts by their opponents threaten to undermine the authority. Ratchets and rollbacks are thus conceived as the product of rhetorical legitimation struggles among the holders and the addressees of IO emergency powers that revolve around the normative standard of proportionality. The chapter derives a set of testable hypotheses from the proportionality model and provides alternative explanations based on variations of rational institutionalism that focus on state power and institutional design.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document