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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Employment practices that reward workers who can travel are sexist in contexts where women are children's primary caregivers and cannot travel as easily as men

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Employment practices that correlate with protected characteristics are not inherently discriminatory if they are genuinely job-relevant and applied neutrally to all applicants.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Labeling a neutral practice 'sexist' because of upstream social inequalities conflates structural causation with institutional culpability, misidentifying the appropriate target of moral criticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Wertheimer's baseline problem in discrimination theory holds that we must distinguish between making someone worse off than a just baseline versus failing to correct a pre-existing injustice caused by other agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The liberal feminist tradition, from Mill through Okin, locates the primary injustice in the gendered division of domestic labor itself, not in downstream practices that reflect it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reforming employment practices rather than caregiving norms risks entrenching the assumption that women will remain primary caregivers, thereby reinforcing the very subordination the critique aims to dismantle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Women are children's primary caregivers in many contexts and therefore cannot travel for work as easily as men
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Employment practices that reward those who can travel create a differential disadvantage for women
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.That differential disadvantage is due to prior sexist practices regarding caregiving roles
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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