Sally Haslanger's Is Equality Tearing Families Apart

Good Essays
Many people look at the difference between men and women to be much more then just Biological. Men are generally seen as much stronger and more skilled. Women are looked at as weak and dependent on a men’s protection. These different roles and stereotypes are given to men and women not based on their personal strengths and weaknesses but based on whether they are male or female. Many argue whether this is morally right or wrong; men and women obviously have very different opinions, luckily there are many philosophers who offer up theories as too the morality of gender roles.
In Sally Haslanger’s Gender and Social Construction: who? What? When? Where? How? It is discussed how gender is not natural it is something that is socially made up. If
…show more content…
It is discussed how he feels equality is not tearing families apart. Things such as Workplace equality, do not destroy a family’s. Complications in schedules brought about by both parents working is something to be considered but it can be worked out. The benefit to women of greater equality outweighs the inconvenience to men of shared responsibility in their home. Later in his writing Anderson responds to Blankenhorn’s view that equality is destroying the family. Anderson’s feels that promoting equality between males and females does not mean losing the roles men and women play as mothers and fathers. The main issue, Anderson proclaims, men and women can have more than one role. The roles could be maintained, but the question of who should fill those roles can be kept open. The idea that a mother would fit the role of nurture is not necessarily true. Anderson feels that as humans a lot of our dignity is earned by not doing what is easy , but by doing what doesn’t necessarily come naturally to us. Anderson’s responses to German sociologist Ulrich Beck that the negotiation on an equal footing between males and females is required and that families can be well-maintained along with equality for women in the …show more content…
He takes the debate between the rights to marriage for same sex couples. Jordan has two theories. The parity thesis and the difference thesis; the parity thesis being in support of same-sex marriages, and the difference thesis being against same-sex marriages. As Jordan discusses these two theories he concludes that it is okay to discriminate against homosexuals because of their sexuality. Jordan says that same-sex couples can be discriminated against in the public sector, but not in the private sector. Meaning that we should only be able to discriminate homosexual behavior if it is done in public, but not if done in private. This attack is based on his assumption that people enjoy seeing heterosexual acts done in public. Jordan bases his theory on his claim that homosexual behavior is only acceptable in private because a public act may involve an unwilling participant. I disagree because following this logic, a heterosexual act, or any act for that matter, done in public involves an unwilling participant if

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    In conclusion, Jordan wanted the state to restrict same-sex marriage but allow private homosexual acts between consenting adults (April Elliot). David Boonin does not believe that Jeffrey Jordan’s argument is sound here. Boonin’s thoughts on same-sex marriages are that governments should sanction them and that people should have the right to marry whomever they want. Boonin adds that Jordan’s second claim is problematic because he does not do a good job of distinguishing the public disagreement. Jordan speaks of the public dilemma as two distinct subjects of disagreement (Rachels).…

    • 1804 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    B. Insert quote here about gay marriage from a different political perspective. C. Insert connection here between that and the sanctity of marriage/other reasons. 1. Explain how it hinders original thesis 2. Pros/cons D. On the contrary, homosexual marriage by itself does not ruin the sanctity of marriage.…

    • 1379 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Homosexual couple’s sex should also be ‘no less real and no less fulfilling’ either based on their principles, these views clearly hold a double standard for marriage and sex. Continuing on with this double standard, many people oppose same-sex marriage based on what is called the Slippery-Slope Argument…

    • 763 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He states that the paper will defend the view that homosexuality is abnormal and undesirable because of a purely mechanical reason (Levin 159). Unlike other commentators that argue that homosexuality is immoral from a religious standpoint, Levin argues purely on the basis of natural selection and how the misuse of body parts can lead to unhappiness. Levin argues that body parts should be used for their intended function and homosexual intercourse does not…

    • 1640 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Flaunting as described by Yoshino is the act of overtly exhibiting one 's homosexuality to society. Flaunting is the direct result of the requirement to cover forced upon LGBTQ+, either overtly or covertly. Normative society is accustomed to homosexual people hiding the more obviously gay elements of themselves and their lives and therefore as a whole feel that one 's homosexuality is flaunted when it is presented in its not covered form. In Covering flaunting illustrates LGBTQ+ people 's attempt to be treated as equals in society by not hiding. Yoshino states, "People can tolerate two homosexuals they see leaving together, but if the next day they 're smiling, holding hands, and…

    • 769 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It is important to expose the way homosexual couples are mistreated. Showing the world exactly how unfair homosexuals feel would shine a light on truly how hard of an impact not being able to use the law like you could if you were heterosexual. Why should this be a problem, everybody should be treated equality. How can the law say “if Ms. Paczkowski were a man in the same position, the law might point towards a different ruling”(1). It shouldn’t matter who is loving the child, whether it be two moms, two dads or a heterosexual couple.…

    • 1093 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It is unjust for any persons human rights to be set aside as less because of their gender. No gay marriage has equal opportunity or same rights unlike blessed heterosexual couples, people have conformed to the notion that same sex marriage is a diversion from a different sex union. Cockburn continues on the subject with the statement:" There 's a fork in the road for progressives. One path is sameness, expanding a troubled institution to same-sexers. But that path detours the real problems of relationships today and their official recognition" (Cockburn).…

    • 1518 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Now, expressing you feel that homosexuality is a sin, is a religious right. But, on the other hand, telling a couple they can’t marry because of it, and making it illegal for gays to marry, is striping homosexuals of their natural rights. We as the United States can’t be known as the country who treats everyone equal, because we don’t. Especially against homosexual males and females. To sum it all up, denying them their natural rights is wrong, and society shouldn’t be dictating who can marry who.…

    • 1071 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Analysis Of Queer's Theory

    • 1850 Words
    • 8 Pages

    On page 2391, the charmed circle chart shows that sex is considered to be “good,” “ normal,” or “natural.” This is the idea that sex is heterosexual and the purpose of it is to reproduce. The other example Rubin provides in the charmed circle is that sex should be coupled, rational, and from the same generation. This is opposed to a person involved with pornography, fetish objects, sex toys, or any role that is not male and female. Anyone who violates these rules are seen as “bad” and “unnatural,”with harsher criticisms aimed at people who have homosexual attractions (2390). The reasons for criticizing homosexuality are multiple: this kind of sex is not procreative, often not married/coupled, and is sometimes commercial (2390).…

    • 1850 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Gay marriage is likewise alluded to as same sex marriage. Same sex connections happen when men and ladies are pulled in to somebody of the same sexual orientation as themselves. As indicated by numerous adversaries, gay relational unions can be portrayed as a greater amount of the deserting of sexual orientation refinements since one can 't have same sex marriage while as yet trusting that sex is pertinent. Consequently, same sexual orientation getting hitched precludes the undeniable reason from securing marriage between a man and lady which is reproduction. This exploration will investigate the contentions for and against gay relational unions and the religious perspective of same sex relational unions.…

    • 1184 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays