Satz Markets in womens reproductive labor

Satz Markets in womens reproductive labor - a Contract...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Will Hodgkins Phil 112 SS1 2011 Satz: Markets in Women’s Reproductive Labor Central project of the paper: Argues in favor of the asymmetry thesis. - Difference between labor and women’s reproductive labor. o Shouldn’t treat it like a commodity. _____________________________________________________________________________ _ Asymmetry thesis: Treating (women’s) reproductive labor as a commodity is worse than treating other kinds of labor as a commodity. - It is bad to commodify this type of labor because of the historical context. o It reinforces gender roles. I. Special nature of reproductive labor a. Features that other forms of labor do not have. a.i. It involves genes. a.ii. It has involuntary components. a.iii. It is long term a.iv. It involves invasions into women’s bodies. II. Special bonds of motherhood
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: a. Contract pregnancy is messed up because it keeps mothers from bonding with their fetuses in a certain way. b. Mother-fetus relationship. c. Mother-child relationship. III. Consequences for children a. Contract pregnancies have negative effects on children. IV. Satz’s argument a. There is something deeply objectionable about gender inequality. b. Contract pregnancies reinforce gender inequality. b.i. Access or control over a women’s body that other kinds of labor doesn’t. b.ii. Encourages women to stay home instead of being in the workplace. b.iii. Increases the chances that motherhood will be defined by only genetics. c. So, there is something objectionable about contract pregnancies d. As a result, the asymmetry thesis is true....
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 10/26/2011 for the course PHIL 112 at UNC.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online