Gender and Family Studies

Gender and Family Studies

Feasibility of Gender Justice in Theories of Justice: Western Philosophers in the Twentieth Century

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Assistant Professor, Women's and Family Research Center
Abstract
This article seeks to study the feasibility of gender justice in common theories of justice by raising two questions: first, do these theories support gender justice?   Second, which category of justice research does the gender justice belong to? This study aims to prove, reject or explain the theoretical foundation of gender justice as a derivative of the rule – or value – of justice, which is conducted according to significant theories on the realm of justice. Thereby, theories of John Rawls, Robert Nozick, Friedrich Hayek, Alasdair MacIntyre and some others are briefly discussed and their relation with gender analysis is explained. These theories are presented within three categories of exemplarist, non-exemplarist, and non-universal theories, which include local (pluralist) and divine theories of justice. The findings of the study indicates that gender justice is a strategy based on structure engineering and individual will; so, it is considered as an exemplarist theory in this regard and can be supported by such theories. However, it receives no theoretical support from non-exemplarist theories, including the critics of exemplarism and universalism. It is noteworthy that although majority of these theories are related to the 20th century, no direct gender analysis can be found in the wide range of literature of these theories- even the exemplarist ones.
Keywords

1. ابوت، پاملا و کلر والاس؛ جامعه شناسی زنان، ترجمه منیژه نجم عراقی؛ تهران: نشر نی، 1380.
2. پیغامی، عادل و دیگران؛ گفتارهایی در عدالت اجتماعی؛ ج1، تهران: انتشارات امام صادق7، 1395.
3. گمپرتس، تئودور؛ متفکران یونانى؛ ترجمة محمدحسن لطفى؛ تهران: انتشارات خوارزمى، 1375.
4. لنگرمن، پاتریشیا مدو؛ «نظریة فمینیستی معاصر»؛ در: جورج ریتزر؛ نظریه‌های جامعه‌شناسی در دوران معاصر؛ ترجمة محسن ثلاثی؛ تهران: نشر علمی، 1374.
5. ورنر، یگر؛. پایدیا؛ ترجمة محمدحسن لطفى؛ تهران: انتشارات خوارزمى، 1376.
6. Kozinski, Thaddeus J; The Political Problem of Religious Pluralism: And Why Philosophers Can't Solve It; Lexington Books, 2010.
7. Macintyre Alsdair; After virtue; Londen, Duckworth press, 1981.
8. Malanczuk Peter; Akehurst's modern introduction to international law; seventh Revised Edition 1997.
9. Blackledge, Paul; Knight, Kelvin; Virtue and Politics: Alasdair MacIntyre's Revolutionary Aristotelianism; University of Notre Dame Press, 15 June 2011.
10. Ciatti, Fabrizio; The spell of the self-ownership thesis: an attempt to break it, Supervisor: Benjamin Ferguson, Advisor: Constanz Binder, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 2016.
11. Fridman; interview Retrieved; 14 February 2015.
12. Hayek. F. A; The constitution of liberty; university of Chicago, Edited by Bruce Caldwell press, 2011.
13. international asociation of feminist economics http: // www.iaffe.org.
14. Kant, Immanuel; Foundations of metaphisic of morals; translated by Lewis Wibeck, NY. Bobbs- Merrill, 1976.
15. Kaufman Alexander; The Myth of the Patterned Principle: Rawls, Nozick and Entitlements, Polity; v.36, n.4 (Jul. 2004), pp.559-578, Published by: The University of Chicago Press.
16. Konow, James; "Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theory"; Journal of Economic Literature, v.41 (4), pp.1188-1239·December 2013.
17. Nozick, Robert; Anachy, state and utopi; Londen (Oxford), Basil Blakewell press, 1979.
18. Riggenbach, Jeff; (November 26, 2010). "Anarchy, State, and Robert Nozick"; Mises Daily. Ludwig von Mises Institute. Retrieved 17 April 2017. https://mises.org/library/anarchy-state-and-robert-nozick
19. Rowls, John; A theory of justice; by the President and Fellows of Harvard College, 1999.
20. Sandel Michael J; Liberalism and the limits of justice; second edition. United states of America, Cambridge university press, 1998.