Outline: 1. 8:30-8:35: Agenda and Attendance 2. 8:35-9:20: From Classical Liberalism to Liberal Feminism 3. 9:20-25: Break 4. 9:25-10:10: Veiled Threats Debate
1. Agenda and Attendance - Take attendance - Reading response papers: re-iterate that these are required. - Ask about extra credit in NYC - Word blocks Aristotle (384-322 BC) Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Enlightenment / liberalism Olympe de Gouges (1748-1793) Practical reason Martha Nussbaum (1947-present) The rights of man (and woman) Liberal feminism Dignity, equality, liberty Humanism vs. relativism Normative argument
2. From Classical Liberalism to Liberal Feminism - The ambiguity of liberalism with respect to feminism o On the one hand, it is the first doctrine in human history to insist on the dignity of human beings as such. I.e. it is the first to insist on their equality or their capacity to exercise their own understanding in determining what is good for them. o On the other hand, despite this abstract commitment to human equality, it fails to address the drastic concrete gender inequalities. - It is this ambiguity that makes liberalism both a source for feminists committed to the project of gender justice while also a source of sexist ideology that feminists have critiqued. In the first part of the class were going to discuss Martha Nussbaums inheritance of these liberal principles how she negotiates this ambivalence legacy. - In order to do that were going to start by talking about the founder of the liberal tradition in political philosophy and an important influence on Nussbaum: Aristotle. o Background on Aristotle (founders of all the major Western sciences) o His definition of the human being: Zoon Logon and Zoon Politikon 2
o How this gives rise to the idea of the human being as animal rationale and eventually Kants definition of the human being as a rational animal. For Kant as for Aristotle what makes us human is our reason and in particular that we exercise in a community, appearing among others. o The problem: for Aristotle the people who were concerned to have logos and were part of the politoks were propertied, aristocratic men. These aristocratic men had the luxury of appearing in the public realm because they owned slaves and had wives who were consigned to the home. In other words, for Aristotle women werent fully human. o What we find in the liberal tradition that begins with him is a commitment to the basic idea that we as human beings are rational creatures, capable of exercising our understanding to choose what take to be good for ourselves; however, we also find a growing expansion of the category of the human. What we find are those that were excluded from the political community demanding to be recognized as human. Thus the Declarations of the rights of Man But also then the Declaration of the rights of Woman. There has been a conflict between liberalisms formal commitment to human dignity and the undignified material state of affairs in which women have and in many cases still do live. (Go to Tori and Morgan). o In the Introduction to her book Sex and Social Justice, the political philosopher Martha Nussbaum has one major goal: to develop the concept of what she calls liberal feminism. As Nussbaum puts it: Human beings have a dignity that deserves respects from laws and social institutions. To say that all human beings have dignity is for Nussbaum to say two things: (1) each of us deserves to be treated as if we have equal worth and (2) each of us ought to have the liberty to choose the sort of life that we believe is worth living, as long as our choices dont harm others. Her belief is that these liberal principles are just fine they just need to be extended to women. We still live in a world in which our laws and social norms have failed to protect and sometimes even violate the liberty and equal worth of women and sexual minorities simply because they are women and sexual minorities. Her argument is that when these groups of people resist this unequal treatment, they tend to appeal to liberal principles: that theyre demanding the right to choose a life for themselves. Why we started with her: were all liberals. For instance, Natasha, writing about why she took this course said, I am very interested in gender, and how societies projections of Gender affect our behavior. Specifically, I want to be a social 3
worker with a focus in helping women all over the world overcome inequalities. Or Beth, who wrote that When I hear the word feminism, I think of the way society perceives a woman. I think of the fights women had in the past, just to get equal rights. Or Mary who wrote that Feminism to me is women or even men wanting better for women and wanting to have power and a voice. Its making women feel confident in their choices they make in their life independently. Or Melissa Amaya, who wrote This is not a just world when it comes to gender. There is no question about it. Anyone who tries to argue that it is needs a wake-up call. Women are treated worse, paid less, and used as public property more than people who are read as male in our world. This is why we have to fight for rights instead of being granted them. Feminism, to me, is about equality. - Internationalism One of the critiques that has been raised about feminist thinkers is that they have been solely concerned with issues that are of concern to white, middle-class, women. Nussbaum says that if feminism is truly concerned with the equal worth and liberty of all human beings, this means that feminism needs to be concerned with the particular issues faced by women across the world. [What sorts of issues of gender injustice do you think are relevant in the United States? Do you think issues are the same with different communities within the United States? How might these differ with those in other countries?] One of the implications of this commitment to an internationalist perspective is that for Nussbaum individuals have moral obligations to protect and promote justice for people outside their national boundaries and that their governments do also (6) [Why does she think this? Do you agree? Are there dangers here?] - Humanism The second component of Nussbaums concept of feminism is that it is humanistic. By humanism, Nussbaum just means the idea that despite the different circumstances, cultures, and traditions that can be found across the world, there are a basic set of facts about human beings, and that these common facts allow us to say something about what living a dignified life would be for any human being. Specifically, she identifies three problems that afflict human beings no matter where they live: scarce resources, competition for resources, and the shortness of life. Nussbaum thinks that if we start by saying that these are three problems that have to be 4
addressed in the case of every human being on the planet, well have a basis for determining what is due to people in every particular situation. Nussbaum calls this the capabilities approach to human development. In other words, she believes there are a set of basic human capacities and functions that deserve to be developed in every case. In making this argument, she is in disagreement with the position of what she calls normative cultural relativism. According to this position, the ultimate standard of what is right for an individual or group must derive from that groups internal traditions (8). [Can you think of examples of practices or traditions that are different or morally egregious with respect to gender that you disapprove of? Do you think that its right?] While Nussbaum thinks that in assessing the situation of woman in very different places, it is important to take these traditions into account, but that we shouldnt presume that the norms of a giving society are right. One of the arguments that she gives in support of her position is the pluralism of cultures. In other words, within a given a culture, it would be wrong to say that all of them feel one way about the treatment of women and therefore we cannot judge them, because there are very likely women that disagree. [Give example of civil rights movement in the US] - Liberalism Nussbaum sees liberal feminism, within the history of liberalism, as adding sex to a long list of morally irrelevant features. Whereas liberals in the past had asserted that the social class you belong to your wealth, the family you were born into, established a hierarchy of values, she wants to insist that sex should also be treated this way. One of the criticisms that Nussbaum answers is that liberalism with its emphasis on the dignity of the individual is too individualistic. Nussbaum wants to account for the importance of social emotions like, love, care, and compassion, while maintaining the liberal commitment to treating an individual as end and not as a means. In the case of women, this means not regarding the value of women as contingent upon their status as reproducers and care-givers. While such concern for the other is valuable, Nussbaum wants to be sensitive to the fact that they are formed under unjust conditions. The choices that liberal politics should protect are those that are deemed of central importance to the development and expression of personhood (11). - Concern with the Social Shaping of Preference and Desire 5
What Nussbaum means here is the fact that what we take to be the good the things that we desire are not something that is entirely in control. In fact, people might not be aware of the basic human goods. So, for example, just because nutrition is not important to a given group of people, doesnt mean that we shouldnt try to promote that good. Not innate but socially shaped. Go into detail about examples. - Concern with Sympathetic Understanding Women as having the attribute of sympathetic understanding, but this as not being good in itself.
Women and Cultural Universals - The hinge: being committed to liberalism means being committed to a certain understanding of the basic features of what it is to have a human life: that is, what Nussbaum calls a cultural universal. This also means being morally committed to how basic conditions ought to be for human beings. This means making judgments on the basis of those standards about other cultures. o There are universal obligations to protect human functioning and its dignity, and [] the dignity of women is equal to that of men. If that involves assault on many local traditions, both Western and non-Western, so much the better, because any tradition that denies these things is unjust. - The objections to this view: anti-essentialism o The argument can be made that in the past, people representing supposedly universal western values, have simply used this appeal to value as an excuse to colonize or civilize or other peoples. This worry has a liberal basis. Faced with this quandary there are a few options: Saying that whatever a given communities norms maintain should be respected. Saying that maybe there are cases where community norms are unjust but that its too difficult to judge, so we should just mind our own business. Nussbaums response: we just have to risk it. Cases might not always be clear-cut, but we can articulate a set of principles that will aid us in making judgments about cases of injustice. And those principles are the capabilities. Customs and political arrangements are responsible for inequalities that lead to women living in sub-human standards. These customs need to be critiqued. Critiques the anti-essentialist view for ignoring pluralism. The question becomes how we measure this. Nussbaum critiques development economics, which says we just measure preference of 6
the male leader of the house hold, and liberalism, which, despite assessing individuals one, by one, fails to take into account deformed preference. Connect to Enlightenment). She instead proposes something similar to Rawls list of basic goods. The benefit of this is that it is universal and applies in all cases. She likes this approach because it isnt determined by preference and that it has a list of capacities, but it also measure things. This emphasis on things doesnt take into account plurality. - Nussbuams positive view: the capabilities approach to human development. o It differs from utilitarian approaches, because it doesnt think that preferences are a reliable indicators o Differs from standard liberal approaches, in that it suggests that resources only matter insofar as they promote functioning o The issue is that this forces us to make judgments about which capabilities are essential to human life across the board. Criteria: What activities characteristically performed by human beings are so central that they seem definitive of a life that is truly human? In other words, what are the functions without which (meaning, without the availability of which) we would regard a life as not, or not fully, human? This has roots in Aristotles teleology. The idea that every being has some good that is proper to it. Go over the list Politics as getting people in the condition to be capable to perform these basic functionings The movement from low-level to high-level capabilities. From basic and internal capabilities to combined capabilities. (What differentiates this from classical liberals like Rawls is that it emphasizes the material conditions) Capabilities versus functionings The distinction between potential and actual (I.e. its up to the choice of the agent, i.e. practical reason. This is a liberal principle) Broad normative aims versus concrete specifcations. 3. Break
4. Veiled Threats Debate - Play NYT clip - Play YouTube clip - Go through Nussbaums article 7
Nusbaums Veiled Threats - Nussbaum begins by citing the wave of laws banning the burqa - The first thing to note is that these ban pertains to how dresses in public o Connect to Aristotle and Kant - Nussbaum begins with her basic liberal premise (P1) that all people are equal bearers of dignity, (P2) that this means they should be able to make choices with respect to their lives, or what she calls conscience; (P3) the faculty of conscience is vulnerable.. (a) it can be damaged from within soul rape or (b) it can fail to achieve expression. o Applies this premise to the case of these bans and issues of religious freedom in general. The conclusion that she draws is that since the religious area of peoples lives is one in which they exercise conscience, it follows that we need laws that protect these peoples rights to have freedom of belief and expression in practice. But theres a split: 1. (A) The weaker view: According to Locke, protecting equal liberty of conscience = (1) laws that dont penalize belief and (2) laws that dont discriminate. E.g. Saying you cant speak Latin in Church but you can in school. 2. (B) The stronger view: According to Roger Williams, since laws in a democracy are determined by the interests of majorities, even if they dont intend to persecute minorities they will likely end up doing so anyway. So in the case of laws that violate a religious belief (e.g. military service), an accommodation should be given. o E.g. Adele Sherbert. While Nussbaum approves of (B) she recognizes its problems: its difficulty to apply, and it usually favors religions. Nonetheless, she says that these Burka laws fail both the Lockean and Williamss test. So she goes through the five arguments and asks whether they meet the basic test of not violating the basic principle of equal respect 1. And 2 Security and transparency But these get applied inconsistently (winter clothes) Points out that its not covering per se but Muslim covering o 3. The Burqa as symbol of male domination.. But (A) people who says this dont know much about Islam and (B) there are all sorts of objectification that we dont legislate against. If we banned all practices we would invade liberty. If there is sexism at work in the burqa, we should exercise persuasion and not coercion. o 4. Coercion People claim women are forced, but this is not true across the board o 5. Unhealthy.
Timothy Scott Sherman v. William L. Smith, Warden, Maryland House of Correction Annex John Joseph Curran, Attorney General For The State of Maryland, 70 F.3d 1263, 4th Cir. (1995)