Catharine MacKinnon's dominance theory and Martha Nussbaum's capabilities approach both locate oppression in the denial of specific, named capabilities or powers—not group-level harm aggregation.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Capabilities approach(Contrasted with Bruckner's subjectivist account): Nussbaum's view that defends the provision of certain capabilities, liberties, and opportunities to all citizens, grounded in an objective notion of the good.
Catharine MacKinnon(the subject of the statement): An American legal scholar and feminist theorist who studies how law and society treat gender inequality, particularly focusing on how women's experiences of power imbalances are often ignored or hidden.
Dominance theory(as MacKinnon's main philosophical contribution): A framework for understanding oppression that focuses on how certain groups maintain power over others by controlling their choices and freedoms.
Group-level harm aggregation(as a contrasting approach to understanding oppression): Measuring injustice by adding up individual harms to groups (like counting total damages) rather than looking at what specific powers or freedoms people have been denied.

Based on where you are in your exploration