Feminist Ethics

To Natacha Saintjean
It is true that women are taught to be loving and caring, that these are traits that are socialized into female children. As a result, it may seem that all women are innately more loving and caring. Yet research also seems to suggest that there may be an evolutionary or biological component to the tendency of women to develop nurturing behaviors (Gilligan 1982; Noddings, 2010). The ability to bear children predisposes the female to nurture and preserve life, rather than resort to violence as a means of conflict resolution. The question then becomes why males are socialized to be aggressive, or whether their biology predisposes them.
Likewise, men and women are socialized differently with regards to acceptable or normative behaviors. It is true that women are freer to express different emotional states like crying without stigma, whereas crying can be stigmatized behavior in a man. Given the importance of self-expression and emotional intelligence for overall psychological functioning, it would seem that socialization processes for men need to be changed.
Being submissive is not necessarily a trait that can be traced to biology. While there will always be people who are “alpha,” and have dominant or domineering personalities, being socialized to defer to men is something that is rooted in patriarchal social norms and institutions, not in biology. Both men and women have the capacity to be controlling or aggressive, and both men and women also have the potential to be weak and submissive. These are not ethical traits in themselves, but abusing one’s power is an ethical problem.
To Brian Hicks
The Gilligan (1982) research showing that women prefer to see the world through human connections does tie in with the question of whether women were socialized this way or whether biology comes into play. If women prefer to make decisions based on human stories instead of mathematical equations, is that because of socialization? It is highly likely that women who exhibit traditionally female qualities like nurturing end up being rewarded for those attitudes and behaviors, whereas women who show a predilection towards using math, science, or reasoning would be dismissed or even criticized. In this way, there are more women in social services and other helping professions—not because they are hard-wired that way but because they are rewarded for their exhibition of feminine traits. If more men also had these traits, then both men and women would be freer to pursue careers that suited their aptitudes. There is nothing inherently wrong with not being an overly nurturing person, so long as one does no harm.
To Kenneth Couch
It is certainly true that there are outliers, that there are always going to be females who can physically outperform males. Yet for the most part, biology does constrain some of the gender differences that are apparent. Whether biology or genetics also determines virtue or ethical behavior is another matter. Nurturing instincts are also present in men, who would seem to have a vested interest in protecting offspring every bit as much as the female would. In many animal species, the male of the pair does a large part of the nurturing. Nurturing is virtuous in the sense that it reveals caring and empathy, and is geared towards selfless alleviation of the suffering of others. On the contrary, some of the ethical virtues that are inculcated into men can lead to problems. Ethical egoism is one example of a moral framework that only serves one’s own best interest. Persons in positions of power often need to resort to violence, corruption, and lying to maintain power—if these are behaviors that women find counterproductive to harmonious decision making and community life, then that would be why men tend to practice them more.



References

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Retrieved from http://courseweb.stthomas.edu/sjlaumakis/Reading 4-GILLIGAN.pdf
Noddings, N. (2010). The maternal factor: Two paths to morality [Electronic version]. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Retrieved from https://library.ashford.edu/ezproxy.aspx?url=http%3A//site.ebrary.com/lib/ashford/detail.action?docID=10675800&p00=maternal+factor%3A+two+paths+morality