PHIL 2500 Lecture Notes - Visible Minority, Job Sharing, Consumerism
46 views3 pages
Domestic Work: Choice or Coercion? Wednesday, March 20th
-Hooks pp. 96-107
-Frye pp. 52-83
Potential exam question- Opting out-not a free feminist choice? Should be able to
argue using Stone and Coooperberg- use their inconsistencies.
What would Hooks change to make opting out more feminist friendly. So Hooks
would say that women themselves need to value their own work, not just those who
are in power to value it.
-Western society says that careerism is the most valuable. Need to be an ideological
change- what we value needs to change. We need to deconstruct capitalist
Ideas that her theory rests on-
(1)Low wage work (factory or service work) they are not meaningful, creative jobs
that lead to freedom or satisfaction. Physically exploitative.
(2)psychologically exploitative. Women receive the message via sexist ideology that
their work in the labour force is not valuable or contributes to society. It’s it out of
financial necessity for themselves, but their not contributing to society at large. Full-
time or career paths, they are considered good or contributing. If a woman does
work it’s out of financial/material necessity for themselves, but not for society.
(3) Difference between basic human needs (physical and mental) to be content and
actual financial independence for women. Types of work that don’t exploit, but that
doesn’t mean that a woman is financially independent.
-example- we can put a price on housework and childrearing, but won’t lead to
financial independence for women.
-Affirmative action- visible minorities, a problem for them, employers could satisfy
affirmative action by hiring women. Further marginalize minorities. More
oppressive to minorities, taken away opportunities for them. Might create more of a
hierarchy. Feminist agenda’s like this are a threat to some. Can be more oppressive
to those who are visible minorities.
Question: Discuss whether or not affirmative action is negative or positive? Is it an
List of a feminist approach to work-
-Should end poverty for all women.
-Ending economic exploitation of women.
-Support welfare and welfare reform. Stop viewing them as parasitic. Recognizes
subjugation and unfairness, get rid of the ideology that those who receive welfare
are lazy, worthless. We need to look at why people need welfare. It’s usually a
degrading process to get welfare.
Creativity over jobs-example, job sharing, high income jobs get shared between
people. Creativity over what jobs look like.
Allocation of money- learn how to manage the money they get.
Resisting compulsions into consumerism (it’s political- boycott, spending less)
Attribute value to all work that women are typically associated with women I
society. A focus on careerism needs to be lessened, there needs to be value on work
within the home. Needs to be a shift. Housework child rearing, not seen as valuable.
Frye- In and out of harm’s way.
-We need a radical feminist vision is needed
“The harm lies in what these processes do to women, the analysis make clear what
these processes produce as product.- What the products are by exploitation and
-the harm lies in what these processes do to women, they make clear what they
-The implications –women themselves resort to women hating.
-Even feminist notions of what it means to be a women that are tainted by
sentimentality. Related to Campbell.
-Coercion- reference to Sartre- denies Sartre’s point- we don’t have complete
autonomous freedom. According to him there are no excuses for making discision.
You can always kill yourself. Frye says that’s rubbish. Frye has an ethic of care, she
doesn’t say that, but that’s what she’s saying.
-Rape- a women is physically no control, if she could move, then she could have
made a different choice. If she can “do” anything, then she’s not coerced. According
to Sartre you can get out of that situation if you can move.
-Frye argues you can make choices and actions, and you can act while at the same
time being coerced. The victims might have control over their body. The victim’s
framework, they are perceiving what would make them safest. the situation has
been manipulated. Their choices are compromised. Choice to stay alive, that’s not
usually something they have to worry about but their available options have been
manipulated. If you perceive that something bad would happen. Their mindset of
their options matter. Rejects the idea that women are only raped when they
physically can’t move, can’t get away. Need to look at the relational aspect.
-Frye’s theory could be linked to Deborah Orr’s informal logic- to coerce someone
into believing something, persuade someone and you threaten them.
- Could link Frye to an Ethic of care- the victims narrative is relevant. Sartre’s more
universal, divisive rational approach, we don’t look at the relational approach. He’s
an example of an ethic of Justice.
Could link to Lorde- Tools that dismantle the masters house. Talks about
interconnectivity. Caring about other people and the results- what happens to other
people, a responsibly.
Caring for other people, responsibility to others who get harmed. Empathetic.
Potential exam question-Link Frye, an ethic of care and Lorde how are they similar.
Should be able to argue using stone and coooperberg- use their inconsistencies. What would hooks change to make opting out more feminist friendly. So hooks would say that women themselves need to value their own work, not just those who are in power to value it. Western society says that careerism is the most valuable. Need to be an ideological change- what we value needs to change. Ideas that her theory rests on- (1)low wage work (factory or service work) they are not meaningful, creative jobs that lead to freedom or satisfaction. Women receive the message via sexist ideology that their work in the labour force is not valuable or contributes to society. It"s it out of financial necessity for themselves, but their not contributing to society at large. Full- time or career paths, they are considered good or contributing.