paper (1100 words)

Jason Lam
LongerPaperAssignment2.pdf

PHIL  451:  Feminist  Moral  Issues   Spring  2019    

Instructor:  Maja  Sidzińska    

 

Longer  Paper  Assignment  Instructions  

 

Write  a  longer  paper  (1100-­‐1500  words  total,  maximum  enforced),  using  your  Short  Paper   as  Part  1  of  this  Longer  Paper.  That  means  continuing  the  paper  from  where  you  left  off  in   the  Short  Paper.  In  other  words,  your  Short  Paper  will  be  Part  1  of  the  Longer  Paper,  and   you  will  now  need  to  write  Part  2.  For  Part  2,  address  ONE  of  the  topics  below,  and  make   sure  you  revise  in  light  of  my  feedback  on  the  Short  Paper.  You  will  need  to  edit  and  adjust   your  introductory  paragraph  and  thesis  somewhat  to  address  the  new,  broader   comparative  scope  of  the  Longer  Paper.     This  paper  is  due  Saturday,  Apr.  27.  Upload  your  paper  to  iLearn  (via  TurnItIn)  before   midnight  on  Saturday,  Apr.  27  (that  is,  by  11:59pm  PST).  This  paper  is  worth  30  points   (30%  of  your  grade  for  the  course).  Therefore,  please  interpret  the  readings  you  are   drawing  on  carefully,  and  develop  your  argument  thoughtfully.       If  your  short  paper  was  on  Topic  1:  Recall  that  Cudd  and  Jones  (2003)  discuss  the   difference  between  "difference  feminism"  and  "equality  feminism."  At  issue  in  this   difference  is  the  question  of  whether  women's  liberatory  project  would  be  best  served  by   positing  the  existence  of  two  types  of  selves:  the  feminine  and  the  masculine  selves  (and   holding  that  they  are  different  yet  equal,  and  advocating  for  equity),  or  whether  women's   liberatory  project  would  be  best  served  by  positing  one  type  of  gender-­‐neutral  self  (and   holding  that  women  and  men  both  possess  this  kind  of  self,  and  advocating  for  equality).   Keep  in  mind  that  both  approaches  to  feminism  are  useful,  with  one  more  useful  in  some   contexts,  and  the  other  more  useful  in  other  contexts.  You  argued  that  one  approach  was   better  for  understanding  the  issues  discussed  in  Manne's  Down  Girl  (the  relations  of   unequal  owing,  as  exemplified,  for  instance  by  the  prevalence  of  sexual  assault,  testimonial   injustice,  and  misogyny/instances  of  misogyny).  But  is  it  also  better  for  understanding   the  problems  of  "other"  women,  and/or  promoting  gender  justice  in  a  transnational   context,  as  described  by  Serene  Khader  in  Decolonizing  Universalism?  Or  do  should   we  change  perspectives  when  we  look  at  this  new  set  of  issues?  When  introducing  your   argument,  make  sure  you  argue  for  a  clear  and  comprehensible  thesis,  and  give  reasons   (logical  reasons,  empirical  evidence,  or  examples/counterexamples)  in  support  of  that  thesis.   Anticipate  and  respond  to  likely  criticism  or  possible  counter-­‐arguments.     If  your  short  paper  was  on  Topic  2:  Throughout  multiple  readings,  the  framework  of   intersectionality  has  been  discussed;  see  especially  bell  hooks  (1984)  and  Trina  Grillo   (1995),  and  the  supplementary  video  resources.  The  question  of  what  women  as  a  group,   are  like,  and  what  their  problems  are  like,  has  been  raised.  Do  all  women  share  a  common   set  of  problems?  Or  given  an  intersectional  framework,  are  different  groups  of  women,   necessarily  sitting  at  different  "intersections,"  not  analyzable  qua  women?  In  other  words,  

we  can  wonder  whether  sexist  oppression  can  be  isolated  from  other  oppressions.  You   argued,  in  light  of  this,  that  the  issues  (misogyny/instances  of  misogyny)  raised  in  Manne's   Down  Girl  either  lend  themselves  to  a  women-­‐qua-­‐women  approach  where  commonalities   are  emphasized  or  that  they  are  better  approached  from  an  intersectional  perspective  in   which  differences  are  emphasized.  But  is  this  also  the  better  approach  for   understanding  the  problems  of  "other"  women,  and/or  promoting  gender  justice  in  a   transnational  context,  as  described  by  Serene  Khader  in  Decolonizing  Universalism?   Or  do  should  we  change  perspectives  when  we  look  at  this  new  set  of  issues?  Keep  in   mind  that  both  approaches  to  feminism  are  useful,  with  one  more  useful  in  some  contexts,   and  the  other  more  useful  in  other  contexts.  When  introducing  your  argument,  make  sure   you  argue  for  a  clear  and  comprehensible  thesis,  and  give  reasons  (logical  reasons,  empirical   evidence,  or  examples/counterexamples)  in  support  of  that  thesis.  Anticipate  and  respond  to   likely  criticism  or  possible  counter-­‐arguments.     Grading  criteria:  your  papers  will  be  graded  based  on  the  following.    

1. Faithful/accurate  interpretation  of  the  text(s)   2. Strength  of  your  argument  (i.e.  Are  you  using  convincing  

reasons/evidence/examples?  Did  you  address  a  counterargument?)   3. Originality  of  your  argument   4. Is  your  argument  concise,  direct,  and  does  it  avoid  making  assertions  without  

support?  Does  your  writing  avoid  repetition?   5. Clarity  of  writing  

  Writing  guidelines:  

• basic  font  (Times  New  Roman,  Cambria,  Calibri,  etc.)   • 12-­‐pt  font   • double  spaced   • author-­‐date-­‐page  citation  style;  e.g.  "(Copp  2008,  187)"     • list  your  references  at  the  end  of  the  paper  (references  do  not  count  as  part  of  the  

word-­‐count)   • do  not  cite  or  paraphrase  the  text  without  giving  the  reference   • do  not  plagiarize-­‐-­‐don't  use  phrases,  sentences,  or  paragraphs  that  are  not  your  

own;  this  is  a  form  of  academic  dishonesty  and  against  university  and  class  policy;   plagiarism  will  result  in  receiving  no  credit  for  the  assignment  and  being  reported  to   the  ethics  division  of  the  university  

• revise,  revise,  revise!  Do  not  write  your  paper  in  one  sitting.