Lindemann's Feminist Ethics

Lindemann's ideas were a new concept to me that I had not even thought about. As Vlad said in his earlier post, if before this unit I were to give a definition to feminist ethics, I would have said the battle to give women the equality to men.

The Greens

Hey everyone,

One of my friends back home is making a very interesting documentary that I think fits in well with what we have been talking about in class. He only has the preview for it ready so far but you should check it out!

What Is Feminist Ethics?

What Is Feminist Ethics? This is both the title of the essay Hilde Lindemann contributes to Russ Shafer-Landau's The Ethical Life and the question she tries to answer within it. Lindemann starts out by defining feminism as both a social and political movement and as a body of theory from which feminist ethics stems from.

Busting the Myth That Women Aren't As Ambitious As Men

Link to article:  http://www.forbes.com/sites/kathycaprino/2011/11/28/busting-the-myth-that-women-arent-as-ambitious-as-men/

This article serves as an extension of the thought introduced in class pertaining to women in the workforce.  As women continue to join the corporate world, I am curious as to why there are very few female CEOs leading large firms.  This is the 21st century and it appears that women have not completely broken through the glass ceiling.  On the contrary, I am not sure if women have even cracked it.  One of the ideas proposed to scarce female leadership is attributed to women lacking as much ambition as the male counterpart.  I am not completely convinced that women lack ambition but they certainly could face different trade-offs for being driven professionally as compared to men.  This article highlights some of the costs for ambitious women as well as the connotations of "ambition" when applied to women and men.

Steubenville and its Relation to Feminist Ethics

Link to the article: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/cnn-steubenville-rape-poppy-harlow-144458279.html

As we begin our discussions into feminist ethics, it is eerily fitting that the Steubenville rape case has become a highlight in the news. If you have not heard the story yet, two sixteen-year old football superstars from Steubenville, Ohio were charged with raping an unconscious, blacked out sixteen-year old girl. They were caught from their posting of pictures and videos of them taking advantage of the girl on social media sites. The article “CNN criticized for Steubenville verdict coverage” by Dylan Stableford of Yahoo News describes the public outcry over CNN’s coverage of the boys being sentenced with rape.

Gender Boundaries

In Hilde Lindeman’s opinion, gender is not factually based. Gender is a norm established by society. In her essay “What is Feminist Ethics?” she details the effects that a prescriptive gender identity can bear on the interactions and relationships between men and women. According to Lindeman, “it’s a power relation, so it tells men that they’re entitled to things that women aren’t supposed to have and it tells women that they are supposed to defer to men and serve them” (155). Society’s construction of gender spurs the sole delegation of power positions to men over women and the unequal distribution of resources, such as money.

The potential effects of defined gender are clearly identified by Lindeman in her essay. However, what she points out is not so clear, is how we as a society actually discern these definitions and draw a black-and-white line between male and female. She points to cases like those with Klinefelter’s syndrome, with three sex chromosomes, and the gray scale of gender that enters in cases of transgender or gender neutrality.

An outdated perspective

                 The article White Privilege and Male Privilege by Peggy McIntosh describes a very accurate image on the 1980's and earlier than that. Upon closer examination of the notes section at the end of the paper it can be seen that McIntosh referenced a piece from 1949, thats 64 years ago. This paper was published in 1988 making it a quarter of a decade old. This particular piece doesn't apply 25 years down the road. Although the white male is very much "privileged" in today's society our culture has taken major steps in leveling the playing field of race and gender. There are now laws that prevent unfair hiring practices according to race and gender and other discriminatory practices. Times have changed but that doesn't mean everything is better there are still many things wrong with society but grievance numbers 24, 10, and 6. But also find number 9 oddly funny as that McIntosh's paper was published but I sincerely doubt that an editor will turn down a top notch paper written by a person of color or a woman than a lesser peper by a white man.
               I grew up in a school district where I, a white male, was the minority and then I came to DePauw. There was a huge difference going from the minority to the majority but the only real difference was the amount of white people and their dominating opinions. I find it funny to hear people talk about minorities and stereotypes, while I sit back and laugh to myself. I find this funny because they themselves are fulfilling a stereotype of a rich white college kid. In my opinion stereotypes come from experiences that stick with them, whether it be a personal interaction or media portrayal of a race. The reason why it sticks with people is because generally the loudest and most annoying people are recognized despite their race. But once the loudest and most annoying person is recognized the person observing the situation then associates the person's actions with the race of the loud and annoying person. All the while everybody else that is keeping to themselves and carrying on with their business in a less loud, rude, or annoying fashion are not seen. Once a person creates these stereotypes they will start to look for them in their surroundings. Someone once told me that once you get your first car all you will see are cars like yours. The same goes for behavior in a social setting.
               The only way to break these stereotypes and to end Macintosh's 40 some grievances against the white male is to recognize this and see it for what it truly is. That those who stick out are noticed just like a car going 120mph in a 40mph zone will attract the attention of a police officer more so than a car going 45mph. Once we recognize this we can start to mend the stereotypes in our society so no one is perceived as lower or higher in status because of race, creed, religion, looks, or gender.

The Young and Obese

The food production industry replies to the demands of consumers, but are they still to blame in the childhood obesity epidemic? Is it possible that consumers are not always fully aware of the psychological and scientific manipulation that food companies use in order to even marginally increase their sales? On February 20, 2013, Michael Moss of the New York Times published an article titled, “The Extraordinary Science of Addictive Junk Food,” in which he gives several small case studies that show the reasoning behind food production and its sales due to the perspective of an insider from that specific industry. After dealing with some of Moss’s listed case studies, we must each ask ourselves the question: Who is to blame for childhood obesity?

Can There Be Humor In White Guilt?
Austin Fry

In her article, White Privilege and Male Privilege, Peggy McIntosh both analyzes gives detailed accounts of how Caucasians have an easier time in modern society.  She describes white privilege as an “invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, assurances, tools, maps, guides, codebooks, passports, visas, clothes, compass, emergency gear, and blank checks.” (McIntosh 1988, 95) After discussing what white guilt means in society, McIntosh lists off forty six privileges that are given to Caucasians simply because they were born with a specific skin tone.  These reason range from not being hassled by security guards

A White Male on White Male Priveledge

After reading White Privilege and Male Privilege A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences through Work in Women’s Studies, by Peggy McIntosh, I have to admit that I was a little taken aback and I felt almost attacked.  It was interesting how towards the beginning of the paper she said, “I think whites are carefully taught not to recognize white privilege, as males are taught not to recognize male privilege.” (McIntosh 1998, 95) I must be one of the males taught not to believe that I had any sort of privilege here in the United States because I certainly in no way believe that.  At first the writing as a whole offended me, but then I kept referring back to that quote and thinking that maybe she was right.  It’s probably true that most white people take for advantage the fact that he list of 46 things is actually true and all of those are very applicable. I personally just struggle to agree, and therefore support her theory, that males really have that much of an upper hand in the work place.  She states that “Virtually all men deny that male over-reward alone can explain men’s centrality in all the inner sanctums of our most powerful institutions.” (McIntosh 1998, 96)

The Societal Impact of Outlaw Emotions

           One focus in Alison Jaggar’s article entitled, Love and Knowledge: Emotion in Feminist Epistemology, is the effect of emotions on our moral judgments. Positivists believe that emotions are irrational. This means that the less emotional and biased group of individuals has a claim to power. However, Jaggar offers the audience an altruistic view that claims emotion as an inevitable part of the human construct: “The alternative epistemological model that I suggest displays the continuous interaction between how we understand the world and who we are as people. It shows how our emotional responses to the world change as we conceptualize it differently and how our changing emotional responses then stimulate us to new insights.” (Jaggar, 184) The author claims that emotions are social constructs, but also to some extent active. The keyword here is active, and I believe that this premise can be explained by outlaw emotions described to the audience using feminist examples.

Are Emotions Really Fully Socially Constructed?

Are Emotions Really Fully Socially Constructed?

In my opinion, the most engaging part of Jaggar’s article Love and Knowledge: Emotion in Feminist Epistemology was his section titled “Emotions as Social Constructs.”  Jaggar begins by introducing the possibility that emotions may be instinctive and biologically determined.  This idea claims that we all feel emotions, and these feelings are individually independent of any other person’s emotional experiences.  Next, Jaggar refutes this position and reveals his belief that emotions are actually socially constructed.  He gives several reasons for his belief.  First, he explains that children are “deliberately” taught appropriate responses to various situations (Jaggar 171).  Jaggar continues by explaining how children also are taught appropriate and inappropriate ways to express their emotions to these specific situations.  These responses and emotional expressions can also vary across cultures; similar to the cultural relativist view in ethics.  Jaggar also deduces that emotions involve judgments, which necessarily require concepts (171).  This framework, he declares, can be seen as socially constructed ways of organizing and making sense of the world (171).  This leads Jaggar to conclude that “individual experience is simultaneously social experience” and, inevitably, emotions are social constructs of cultural experience (172).  While reading this section, several things came to mind.  First, I agreed with both viewpoints.  The biological instinctive reactions vary between people, but also most of us channel those feelings into socially (and culturally) accepted actions.  I agree with all of what Jaggar has to say about emotions being socially constructed, except for when he says that the first view is “quite mistaken” (171).  I started thinking about individuals who suffer from emotional and social disorders.  For instance, someone with Bipolar Disorder has a difficult time absorbing cultural norms when reacting emotionally.  Their genetic makeup is different and causes them to experience the severity of emotions in different ways than you and I.  Additionally, people struggling with anger management seem to experience non-socially constructed emotions.  These people have been brought up in a culture similar to anyone else and thus have been taught the appropriate responses to different actions and appropriate ways to express their emotions.  However, they fail to comply with these socially accepted standards.  I am not sure if my analysis on these people is correct or not; maybe the only difference is that people with anger management have a lack of self-control.  Nevertheless, their intense emotional feelings could be a product of their biologically instinctive makeup.  In conclusion, I believe that our emotional feelings are a direct result of our biological genetics mixed with social construction.  I find it hard to believe that someone such as James Holmes (killed people in the Colorado movie theatre) could be the product of socially constructed emotional expressions and reactions.

White Male Privilege: Will It Ever End?

In Peggy McIntosh's, White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences through Work in Women's Studies, she discusses the issues surrounding racial stereotypes and how they interfere with all aspects of life. She first focuses on how white privileges aid some and hinder others. She explains how this racism is dealt with between cultures, and the levels of denial that are in play. In some cultures it is widely talked about with angry voices, whereas others know it's going on, and pretend it does not exist. Next, because she has difficulty studying racial profiling in her own life, she finds this problem parallels male privilege in the workplace. McIntosh then goes on to list forty-six different ways white privilege plays a role in her life at work.

First, McIntosh goes on a rant about men ignoring their privileges. Those that do acknowledge it believe that it won't come to an end. McIntosh writes, 

"Virtually all men deny that male overreward alone can explain men's centrality in all the inner sanctums of our most powerful institutions. Moreover, those few who will acknowledge that male privilege systems have overempowered them usually end up doubting that we could dismantle these privilege systems. they may say they will work to improve women's status...but they can't or won't support the idea of lessening men's."

My first reaction to this statement was denial, and that there have to be some men who agree that sometimes, male privilege is exactly the reason why certain men are in power, and not because they are qualified. When I revisited the thought, however, I fell in accordance with McIntosh. What man would be willing to say that another man of power is only holding that power because he is male? At the same time, isn't a fair accusation. There is no way for us to know if a man of power would still be in his position if there was no male privilege. He could be perfectly qualified for his job. McIntosh goes on to explain how most of men's oppressive is unconscious. The notion that women are less than men has been engrained into the minds of men everywhere. Even in daily conversation between my male friends and I, there are hints made about how they think women are less capable of doing certain things as they are.

McIntosh notes the parallel between male privilege, and white privilege, and how, similar to men's unconscious oppressiveness, white people can be oppressive too. She comments:

"whites are taught to think of their lives as morally neutral, normative, and average and also ideal, so that when we work to benefit others, this is seen as work that will allow 'them' to be more like 'us'"

Being a white person myself, I can agree with this. It is an uncomfortable topic, but one that needs to be discussed. When I think of an average lifestyle, I think of the one I am living now, except for the fact I go to a very expensive, private school. I grew up in a white collar neighborhood, attended public schools and have a mother, a father, and two pets. I view my life as an average one, where I get to enjoy a few luxuries and can live comfortably. When I think about people in poverty, I want to help them to be able to live a life like mine, but this isn't right. What I fail to recognize is how privileged my life is. I'm white, so I don't have to deal with racial profiling at work, or by the police or by my teachers at school. Because I am a white girl, with parents who make a comfortable amount of money, my teachers have automatically assumed that I am a good student. Police officers don't give me a second look if I drive by in my car late at night. My employers think that I am a person worthy of their trust, simply because of my skin color. I agree that this is privilege, and that it benefits me, but I wish it didn't have to exist this way.

Lucky for me, my eyes have already been opened to this issue of white privilege. I have become very close with a male friend on campus who explained to me his difficulties with racial profiling. I even have experienced it myself. We were driving late at night, not speeding or disobeying any laws, when he was pulled over. The officer asked him to get out of the car, and followed by asking him a series of questions. Then, he told my friend to get back in the car, as we waited, a very long time, for him to write a ticket. It turns out that they pulled him over because one of the lights illuminating the license plate had gone out. I can't help but think that he was pulled over because of his skin color. While I wish white and male privileges to come to an end, I am not sure they ever will. Whites and males have been privileged since the beginning of time, and has been engraved into our society. Hopefully, years from now this way of thinking will come to an end, but I believe it will take a very long time. 

Technology in Ethics: Surrogacy

Surrogacy is definitely a practice that is becoming more and more relevant.  I believe Professor Molly Shanley said that experts have yet to collect significant information on surrogate children because most of them are younger than 6 years old.  As Nick already touched on, surrogacy introduces a wave of new ethically controversial ideas.  Pro-choice/Exploiting underprivileged wombs is one of the most prominent.  Nick also discussed how families searching for a surrogate would most likely be against abortion.  We discussed this idea and it is based on the notion that surrogate-seeking families have obviously tried, unsuccessfully, to have children.  They decided to find a surrogate because the idea of a human life that would be theirs is something they have always wanted.  Using this logic they should find the idea of abortion repulsive, right?  Nick also discussed how this is contradictory because these families are pro-life on one topic (abortion) and pro-choice on another (surrogacy).  This has lead me to think about the role of technology in ethics.  Without technology, surrogacy would be impossible and this contradiction would have been prevented.  Does anyone have any opinion on the role of technology in ethics and what role it will likely assume as it continues to become a more integral part of our lives?

Surrogacy and Abortion

In her lecture entitled, Fertility Tourism and the Ethics of Intercountry Surrogacy: Renting Wombs in the Global Marketplace, Professor Molly Shanley discussed the morality of surrogacy agreements that span across the world. Much like our current discussions in class, Professor Shanley presented the opposing argument of the exploitation of women’s bodies in foreign countries for cheap surrogacy, and then refuted it with a pro-choice argument wherein women have the right to choose what to do with their bodies. After hearing her argument, I could not help but to draw comparisons to another debate involving a pro-choice argument: abortion.

Ethics Behind Surrogacy: Lyndon Presentation

Lee Renshaw
Everett

Ethics Behind International Surrogacy

   Mary Lyndon (or Molly Shanley; not entirely sure how that works) spoke about the ethical conflicts revolving around the practice of surrogacy, meaning when a a couple is socially and/or physically incapable of having a baby and so they decide to "use" the womb of a woman who is able to bear a child.  She used the example of Indian women doing this for people in the U.S., but her focus was on the issue itself, not necessarily on certain nations or cultures.  She brought to light the opposing views on the subject are and then inserted her own two cents.  She obviously has her own opinion and is therefore biased to one side, but she presented both arguments quite fairly, which is something we have learned to do and are practicing in class now.  

    In her speech, Lyndon explained that the surrogate mothers in India are paid between five and seven thousand dollars.  However, at the end, during the question-answer period, an inquiry was raised regarding how exactly women were paid, meaning how the money was distributed periodically in case of a miscarriage or other accident were to happen.  That way, the women didn't get paid in full until the baby was actually born.  She also raised a point in her speech about how the Indian doctors told them that they were merely vessels for rent; that they sever no purpose in the process of pregnancy, except for being the womb to grow their baby in and then give to them  over to the intending parents, without developing any kind of attachment.  Those on the side of for the Indian women being surrogates would argue, on the other hand, that this surrogate processes develop relationships between the American families and those of the Indian women who gave birth to their child.  Another question was raised, however, and it was one of a rather interesting perspective but a valid and important point nonetheless.  The audience member made a connecting comment before her question.  Her comment was that there are some Indian women who do not want any kind of relationship with the intending parents or their family.  As was mentioned towards the beginning of her speech, Lyndon mentioned the notion that the Indian women would not do this if they had any better opportunity to make money.  So, there are of course at least a few of them who only do it for the money and do not desire any communication outside of that which is necessary during the surrogacy.  The question that followed the comment was the obvious one concerning this group of women and how their situations would be handled.  

     In my opinion, the concept of international surrogacy is a highly debatable subject that isn't solved easily.  From my point of view, the overarching question is: is it fair to the Indian women?  Is it right to give the option of carrying someone else's child and putting herself at great physical and emotional risk to a woman who has virtually no other economic option?  Yes, they are paid nearly ten years annual income for a successful birth, which would help their families enormously.  However, there are several possible dangers that come with pregnancy, ranging from the physical perils that are always a risk to the possibility of the women becoming emotionally attached to the baby inside them.  Women who go through pregnancy naturally form some form of bond with their babies, even though they may not be their own.  For me, it comes down to weighing out the fairness of the whole practice; to comparing the benefits and the detriments of surrogacy in general.  In my view, the risks outweigh the financial gains, but that is the opinion of a complete stranger to the entire concept.  The main opinion that should be taken into account is that of the Indian women.  As long as everyone involved gives wholehearted consent and cooperation, then it is a win-win situation.

Fertility Tourism, Do the Ends Justify the Means?

When listening to Molly Shanley's March 10th lecture on Fertility Tourism and the Ethics of Inter-country Surrogacy, I was surprised to learn that Professor Shanley believes that fertility tourism is ethical. While Shanley notes that surrogacy often creates an unnatural hierarchy of humans (and often social classes), can created a skewed vision of family, and seems outright exploitative (and potentially reminiscent of Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, a dystopian novel where

Fertility Tourism and the Ethics of Intercountry Surrogacy

Intercountry surrogacy: an opportunity for economic improvement in the lives of the poor or a new, exploitative practice that exerts patriarchal control over women's bodies? This is one of the fundamental questions that speaker Molly Shanley explored in her topic, "Fertility Tourism and the Ethics of Intercountry Surrogacy: Renting Wombs in the Global Marketplace". For her, intercountry surrogacy has many positive aspects to it, including that the woman is able to exercise personal agency in that she has control over the decision to do with her body what she chooses. In this case, she chooses to "rent" out her womb in the hopes of improving her economic situation. Since many surrogates are chosen from the Global South to become surrogates for people of the Global North, there is this opportunity for them to make a substantial amount of money that has the potential to change their lives. This is also helpful for many families and individuals of the Global North that cannot afford, or are unwilling to pay the much higher costs for surrogacy within their own countries. Shanley admits that more work needs to be done to study whether or not these surrogates' lives are actually improved after they have performed these services. As of right now, it is unclear.

What is truth, anyway?

Thought you might enjoy today's edition of The Stone - a Philosophy column on the New York Times.  I'm wondering whether Lynch's pluralist account of 'truth' might alleviate some doubts about the viability of objectivism.  Enjoy.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/05/of-flies-and-philosophers-wittgenstein-and-philosophy/