Analysis Of Clea Simon On The Interpretation And Dissection Of Gender Inequality

What is feminism? The definition is often argued over by feminists and anti-feminists. Feminists believe that the expectations for women are far too high to be attainable for most—they are expected to be the perfect weight, the perfect height, the perfect everything in the eyes of society in order to be seen as worth anything. Feminists believe that women are seen by society as less powerful, less smart, simply less than men. Feminists also believe that feminism promotes gender equality, not misandry. They aim to fix this. Anti-feminists, on the other hand believe that feminism is women being obnoxious and putting themselves above men. They think feminism in 2015 in unnecessary. Women already have the right to vote, what more could they possibly want? This oppression is just one reason why feminism exists and—in my opinion—is extremely important in today’s world.

John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice holds that a rational, mutually disinterested individual in the Original Position and given the task of establishing societal rules to maximise their own happiness throughout life, is liable to choose as their principles of justice a) guaranteed fundamental liberties and b) the nullification of social and economic disparities by universal equality of opportunities, which are to be of greatest benefit to the least advantaged members of society , . Rawls’ system of societal creation has both strengths and weaknesses, but is ultimately sound.

This passage particularly coincides with the concept of distribution Rawls, Two Principles of Justice. Rawls’ principles of justice include first; the equal distribution of rights and liberties for all and second; Permissible inequality in distributions, according to what is being distributed. Distribution must however benefit everyone and offices should be open to all. Rawls concedes that the government, consented for by the people should distribute economic and social goods to its citizens, yet he claims that inequality will develop over the distribution because of certain factors such as need, position and so

What is feminism? According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary the standard definition defines feminism as “the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.” I believe the word feminism means a woman who is capable of doing the exact things a man can do. Both men and women are equal regardless the gender. There are many misconceptions when it comes to the word feminism such as, women having hatred towards men, women thinking they're above men, or only women can be feminist, and the gender stereotype. On the other hand, feminism is gender equality, acknowledging that any kind of violence is unacceptable regardless the gender, and realizing that women and men are not the same and recognizing that gender and sex are

John Rawls states that the principle of fairness is important as it applies to individuals the principle of fairness are a link between the two principles of social or political justice and individual obligations to comply with specific social practices (Pogge, 2007). By expanding the scope of what one considers to be an ‘end’ to include both aspects of nature as well as future generations, one can transform the implications of Rawls’ theory (Pogge, 2007). Rawls advances his theory of justice through what is called the Original Position which is a hypothetical situation in which all individuals are granted perfect equality and are asked to choose a principle of justice behind a veil of ignorance, which eliminates their biases (Pogge, 2007). The hypothetical persons in the Original Position, ignorant of who and what they will be in society and perfectly equal to one another, are able to truly come to a consensus as to what a just society would be (Pogge, 2007). Justice

The battle to achieve a sense of fairness and equality has been relevant amongst humans since the beginning of time. Advocates who effortlessly argue the need for an equal socioeconomic system recognize that little to no change has been made throughout time. Philosopher John Rawls’s principles of fairness and equality state that everyone has a right to basic liberties and the greatest social and economic privileges are granted only if the greatest social and economic benefits are granted to the most disadvantaged people. The articles, “Still Separate, Still Unequal” by Jonathan Kozol, “Rethinking Affirmative Action” by David Leonhardt, and "Progress Made, but Science Still a Man 's World: News" by David Matthews, all illustrate how John Rawls’s principles are still not being realized today to their fullest extent. In Jonathan Kozol’s article, he demonstrates how the educational system in America is still racially divided despite the end of segregation in the 1900s. In David Leonhardt’s article, he conveys the notion that although people have equal rights there still exists a gap in fairness. In David Matthews’s article, he focuses on the fact that women are still overruled by men in the workplace despite previous strong efforts of gender equality in the United States.

The definition of feminism is very elusive. Maybe because of its ever-changing historical meaning, it’s not for certain whether there is any coherence to the term feminism or if there is a definition that will live up to the movement’s variety of adherents and ideas. In the book “No Turning Back,” author Estelle Freedman gives an accurate four-part definition of the very active movement: “Feminism is a belief that women and men are inherently part of equal worth. Because most societies privilege men as a group, social movements are necessary to achieve equality between women and men, with the understanding that gender always intersects with other social hierarchies” (Freedman 7).

John Rawls a political theorist engages in various political theories and arguments that contradict, support, and scrutinizes others theories made by other notable political theorist. Rawls contemplates usage of theories such as The Theory of Justice, Veil of Ignorance and Nozick’s Entitlement Theory which will be discussed within this analysis for their relation to society and what benefits or aliments they hold if any on society’s effective function.

John Rawls was an American political and moral philosopher. Rawls attempts to determine the principles of social justice. In this essay, I will elucidate John Rawls’ views on forming a social contract, the counter-arguments against Rawls’ theory and finally the state of debate on the counter-arguments. John Rawls set out on his discussion on justice and fairness in his book A Theory of Justice 1971. Rawls theory describes a society with free citizens holding equal basic rights regardless of the social status (poor or rich). Each society has its way of attempting to bring about equality in its political and economic systems. The tenets of distributive justice, therefore, act as an ethical guide to the

In A Theory of Justice John Rawls presents his argument for justice and inequality. Rawls theorizes that in the original position, a hypothetical state where people reason without bias, they would agree to live in a society based on two principles of justice (Rawls 1971, 4). These two principles of justice are named the first and second principles. The first is the equal rights and liberties principle. The second is a combination of the difference principle and the fair equality of opportunity principle, or FEOP (Rawls 1971, 53). Rawls argues that inequality will always be inevitable in any society (Rawls 1971, 7). For example, there will always be a varied distribution of social and economic advantages. Some people will be wealthier than

The distributive justice theory of John Rawls concerns justice as fairness. In his theory, Rawls defines justice as demanding equality, unless inequality makes the least advantaged person better off. Rawls proposes two major principles of justice: (1) that each person should have the same equal right to basic liberties and (2) that social and economic inequalities are attached to positions and offices open to all under equality of opportunity and are to the benefit of the least advantaged group of society. This theory is determined by a social contract that assumes there is a natural state on which people will agree based on moral equality. In this social contract, all members wear a veil of ignorance through which they do not know anything about their own

To achieve a just society, Rawls believes in two principles. The first principle states that each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for others. The second principle is that social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both a)reasonably expected to be to everyone's advantage, and b) attached to positions and offices open to all (Rawls, 60).

According to John Rawls ideology of justice is that it is equated to fairness. Rawls offers two principles of justice, the first being that each individual should have equal rights and opportunity to liberty. Secondly that

second, they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least-advantaged members of society (the Difference Principle)” (Rawls, 63). This meant that there needed to be fair and equal opportunity for all to obtain the best jobs in the public and private sector of society. It also meant that education needed to be accessible for all people. He also made clear that the lower class of society or the ones with the least advantages should be compensated or concessions should be made for them in the quest for fairness. In other words economic inequalities were ok if they benefited society and especially the ones with the least advantages. Rawls concentrated on the

Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in the original position. Michael Sandel, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice argues that Rawls' conception of the person divorces any constitutive attachments that persons might have to their ends. Hence, Sandel asserts that Rawls privileges the standpoint of self-interested individuals at the expense of communal interests. I do not find Sandel's specific criticisms to be an accurate critique of what Rawls is doing in A Theory of Justice. However, this does not mean the more general thrust of the communitarian analysis of Rawls' conception of the person must be abandoned. By picking up the pieces