Sammy Karon
1 February 2015
Iris Young defines oppression as
“structural phenomena that immobilize or diminish a group” (42). Catherine
MacKinnon’s discussion of gender discrimination thus focuses on women as a
social group oppressed by privilege men and the legal structures of capitalist
society. MacKinnon specifically disagrees with how women are either evaluated
by their similarities or differences to men, with men being the standard
measure of value in all aspects of life. Because women are measured in
comparison to men, they are automatically less than men because they are the
“other,” and anything they generate in their life is still evaluated in terms
of male value, not female. Young would categorize this issue as exploitation, or
the transferring of results of labor from one group to benefit another (49).
America’s economy is structured so that women work for men, and the results of
their labor continue this system in a positive-feedback loop, with men growing
richer and more powerful by each dollar a woman generates. MacKinnon notes that
women face “material desperation” that drives them to the lowest paying jobs in
society, which I see as an example of marginalization and powerlessness (88). Although
women are less marginalized than some other groups in terms of employment, the
current system does marginalize women in the way that it cannot or will make
room for them in executive positions of industry. I see the lack of women in
top business positions as evidence that the system wants to protect male
dominance by preventing women from entering the elite workforce, and I see it
as an issue of Young’s powerlessness: because women cannot get executive
positions in significant numbers, they cannot mediate the decisions of men
which are harming them in the first place. Thus, women are exploited for their
labor and powerless to the extent that they cannot take control of their
industries to change the pattern of injustice. MacKinnon’s argument does not
take up the issue of cultural imperialism, because women are so distinctly
different than men that they do not feel invisible. In other words, men depend
on blatant gender differences to enforce discrimination. However, MacKinnon
does bring up Young’s last category of oppression, violence, in her paper. The
fact that one out three women face rape or attempted rape in their lifetime
just because of their gender exemplifies Young’s definition of violence,
“living with fear of random, unprovoked attacks” (61). Because Young considers
a group to be oppressed if they can be said to face any one of the five
categories of oppression, women would without a doubt be considered an
oppressed group by Young’s standard.
Works
Cited
MacKinnon, Catherine. “Difference
and Dominance: On Sex Discrimination,” in The
Moral Foundation of Civil Rights,
eds. Robert K. Fullinwinder and Claudia Mills. Rowman and Littlefield, 1986, pp. 32-45.
Young, Iris Marion. “Five Faces
of Oppression,” in Rethinking Power, ed.
Thomas Wartenberg. Albany, NY: SUNY
Press, 1992, pp.39-65.
It is clear that you do a really good job of addressing Young's theory on the forms of oppression and how these forms fit within the specificity of "the legal structure of capatalist society" according to Mackinnon, but it doesn't really address the key aspect of Mackinnon's work and differentiate between difference and dominance. I like the fact that you explain each form of oppression according to Young and then develop it within Mackinnon's context and your excellent transitioning makes it easy to follow this rationale. One thing Young argues about culture imperialism is that it is experienced by all oppressed groups, yet this is the only form of oppression you claim Mackinnon doesn't discuss. While I understand your logic in that women are "so distinctly different" they cannot feel invisible, I don't think that either MacKinnon or Young would agree with you because one could feel invisible in terms of marginalization and because cultural imperialism isn't entirely bases on invisibility (De Bois' theory of "double consciousness"). I think excluding cultural imperialism, if only from Mackinnon's work, also put you in direct opposition of those who disagree, which is a shame because you support the presence of the other forms of oppression really well.
ReplyDelete