Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    All women should be placed into 'sex class' because all w... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    All women should be placed into 'sex class' because all women are potentially subject to exploitation of their unpaid housework.

    Moral ResponsibilityRights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.All women are trained into the gender roles of patriarchal wife and motherhood.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Being trained into these roles makes all women potentially those whose unpaid housework can be exploited.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Potential subjection to exploitation is insufficient to constitute a shared class position; actual structural relations of production define class membership (Wright, 1997).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Women in capitalist owner classes materially benefit from the exploitation of other workers, including domestic workers, creating antagonistic rather than shared class interests.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989) establishes that race and class materially differentiate women's relation to domestic labor, as some women's freedom from housework historically depended on other women's coerced labor.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A classificatory scheme grounding shared class membership on 'potential' exploitation obscures these concrete hierarchies and reproduces the universalizing error of second-wave feminist essentialism (Spelman, 1988).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityRights & Liberty

    Connections

    2 topics

    Virtue Ethics1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    A classificatory scheme grounding shared class membership on 'potential' exploit...All women are trained into the gender roles of patriarchal wife and motherhood.Being trained into these roles makes all women potentially those whose unpaid ho...Intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989) establishes that race and class materi...
    +2 moreShow less
    Potential subjection to exploitation is insufficient to constitute a shared clas...Women in capitalist owner classes materially benefit from the exploitation of ot...

    Similar

    Being trained into these roles makes all women potentially those whose...81%Women constitute a 'sex class' (or gender class) that cuts across econ...78%Seeing oneself as a member of 'sex class' and as exploited requires po...76%The sex/affective work of mothering and wifely nurturing is exploitati...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: feminism-class
    View source passageHide passage
    Sylvia Walby deals with this ambiguity of economic class as applying to women as unpaid houseworkers by claiming against Delphy (1984) that the relevant economic sex classes are those who are housewives vs. those who are husbands benefiting from such work, not those of all women and men, whether or not they do or receive housework services (Walby 1990). Ferguson, however, sides with Delphy in putting all women into “sex class”, since all women, since trained into the gender roles of patriarchal
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit