Young and Mackinnon
The five faces of oppression, according to Iris Young, are exploitation,
marginalization, powerlessness, cultural dominance, and violence. Catharine
MacKinnon immediately addresses the fourth facet of this definition various
times in her article. Particularly, in the first two pages of said article where
she describes the first two alternate paths to equality that stem from and
dominate politics, law, and social perception, she begins the argument of how
the equality of women is being set on scale where men set the norm or standard.
As she explains, “the legal mandate of
equal treatment… becomes a matter of treating likes alike and unlikes unlike,”
of which “the sexes are defined as such by their mutual unlikeness.” Simply
put, gender is a social construct, and this concept of equality, which accepts
alikeness, and sex, which accepts unlikeness. Its contradictory nature leads to
the evolution of two distinct paths towards equality, one, which favors
alikeness, and one that does not. The first path is that of imitation, where
women are told to be the same as men. Cultural dominance is clear here. Men,
their station, privilege, and right, are established as the norm and the
desired goal or outcome. The establishment of this position is due to cultural
expressions and history displayed and defined as superior to others’. For many
years, a woman in the workplace was thought of as strange, and even now, as a
norm, women earn far less than men in the same line of work. By treating this a
“universal,” society accepts these culturally misogynistic traditions. Though
it implies a degree of equality, it actually implies more of a parallel to “the
same as,” which is most definitely not what the end goal is or should be. This
path also coincides with another of Young’s face of oppression, marginalization.
Women, as history shows, have a harder time at acquiring and maintain steady
jobs mostly due to their gender, not their ability. Thus, a marginalization is
created. In addition, in the women’s history, the fairer sex has continuously
been left out of the labor market. MacKinnon’s second path describes how women
should accept their differences form men. Playing even more into both
marginalization and cultural dominance, to accept these differences is to
accept that men establish the norm, that women remain marginalized from the
labor force, and that sex discrimination actually has a substantive claim.
Throughout her article, MacKinnon
points out how “man has become the measure of all things,” while women “are
measured according to our correspondence with man, our equality judged by our
proximity to his measure.” It is within this context that she unravels sexual
discrimination as a result of two of the five faces of oppression, marginalization
and cultural dominance. Her main example stems around hos women have developed
the fight of equality into a discussion of sameness and difference, which
perfectly display the conflict and contradiction within the argument itself.
I could not agree more with your interpretation of MacKinnon through the lens of Young. The biggest issue is that the oppression of women is one that is structural, or one that has been built into the societal norms of the everyday workings in our society. As you say, "women 'are measured according to our correspondence with man, our equality judged by our proximity to his measure." This is the determent of a well ingrained fabric of social norms that marginalize and exploit women, that the very system itself is not conducive to hearing the voices of a vast population of its people.
ReplyDeleteFernanda, I really enjoyed and agree with your analysis of MacKinnon’s argument through Young’s five faces of oppression. I think you brought up an important point when you highlighted that MacKinnon states that gender is a social construct, which might be why there is no natural solution to the inequality between men and women. As there was never supposed to be an unequal and oppressive distinction between the sexes, there is no easy way to address the problems so pervasive in society. Your definition of the two paths that come from the social construct, “one which favors alikeness, and one that does not” simplified and clarified MacKinnon’s more complex explanation. It made it much easier to synthesize the paradox that MacKinnon provides about women’s quest for equal treatment, yet their need for individual treatment for their differences. Continuing with this contradiction of likeness and unlikeness, you defined and explained how women experience both cultural domination and marginalization. I liked your application of both these facets of oppression to the labor market and women’s continued struggle for equal treatment at the cost of their differences and distinctions. Your post was very concise and had both direct references to the text, as well as real life contemporary examples, which made both MacKinnon’s and your arguments much more understandable.
ReplyDelete