Rather, she requires most of these to be sex terms and conditions and you can keeps one to (the norms regarding) femininity/masculinity consider gender normativity

Mikkola (2011) argues your sex/gender improvement, hence underlies opinions such Rubin’s and you may MacKinnon’s, has actually certain unintuitive and you can unwanted ontological requirements one to render the fresh new improvement politically unhelpful. Basic, stating one to gender was socially built implies that the existence of women and men are an intellectual-founded matter. This means that we will perform away that have men and women by just modifying specific public means, conventions or conditions on which gender depends (whatever men and women try). 2nd, claiming that gender try a product away from oppressive societal forces implies one to getting rid of men and women is feminism’s political mission. However, which harbours ontologically undesirable duties because so many ordinary societal agencies look at their gender to get a source of positive value. So, feminism generally seems to should do aside with a thing that is never be removed, that is unlikely in order to inspire societal agencies fru mexikansk to do something with techniques you to point at the gender fairness. Considering these problems, Mikkola contends one to feminists would be to surrender the brand new huge difference on the simple political grounds.

Put another way, feminist philosophers presumably possess yet to provide good reasons to think you to ‘woman’ does not merely select mature people female. Continuarea →