Issues and Practice in Society
- Aristotle’s Perspective on Women’s Intellect and Leadership
Aristotle’s views on the gender differences in the intellect are simply a rebuttal to the social hierarchy, which is ranked based on intellect and physicality. He maintains that it is the destiny of those capable of foresight to lead, and those whose talents are restricted to rule execution are subjects or enslaved people by birthright. Such a position derives from the structure of society in ancient Greece, where men were masters of politics and intellectual life. At the same time, women were practically nurturers confined to households (Connell, 2021). A position attributed to societal expectations and cultural attributes is the same as the one Aristotle held for women’s leadership roles in the first place during his time. We must accept Aristotle’s words within the constraints of the quantity and caliber of knowledge available during his era. The inexistence of educational prospects for women in classical Greece is significant in his view of their intellectual capacities. By being limited to the household, women’s chances for formal education and intellectual pursuits were minimal, which, in turn, reflects Aristotle’s gender-biassed views. Although Aristotle’s vision during his lifetime might have been quite convincing, the modern approach and practice discredit its worth. Many modern studies have shown that intellectual abilities are not profoundly linked to gender but may be affected by external factors like education and social influence. Thus, Aristotle has paved the way for discussion on gender equality and understanding, yet his ideas might not be perfect compared to the present-day world.
- Simone de Beauvoir’s Analysis of Gender Double Standards
Simone de Beauvoir, one of the existentialist philosophers, challenged gender relations’ complex system and revolutionized it by identifying the societal roles that shape the imbalances. She asserts that enforced social mores foster two-dimensional perceptions of love, allowing women to be recipients of male affection and men to be diligent seekers. This conflict generates unbalanced strength positions, in which men have more authority and control in relationships. De Beauvoir’s examination reflects the existentialist attitudes of freedom and accountability, which show that society’s norms muzzle the individual’s genuine expression (Nwanokwai-OGBENEGE, n.d.). As a result of social norms, women find their freedom of expression limited, which does not in any way enable them to be themselves in a relationship. The current reflection demonstrates progress in terms of challenging the old gender patterns, which equality advocates and the high level of awareness mainly drive. There is a gradual trend toward a decline in the double standard, evidenced by the legal reforms and changing social attitudes that promote more equal relationships (Anderson, 2020). Beauvoir’s wisdom is still relevant, which asks that we work toward dismantling gender roles and realizing true equality in every aspect of life.
- Assessment of Aristotle’s Influence on Gender Double Standards
Aristotle’s perception of the relationship between man and woman brings us back to the double standard recognized by de Beauvoir. His world of hierarchy, where men are deemed superior and destined for leading roles, is forever perpetuating the unbalanced power dynamics between the two genders. Through placing women as second hand in the intellect and subordinate positions, his philosophy served as a basis for the subjugation of women. For Aristotle, the issue of women being systematically disadvantaged and kept away from power aligns with the model of patriarchy rampant during his time (Connell, 2021). His support of a well-defined structure of gendered hierarchy reinforces social norms that favor male dominance and reject female independence. Hence, the arguments of Aristotle, as put forward by de Beauvoir, do not just support this double standard but contribute to its maintenance.
- John Stuart Mill’s Hypothesis on the Subjection of Women
John Stuart Mill offers a reason for why women have previously been oppressed. He argues that women were deprived of their rights because men physically dominated and had more power. These inequalities were fastened to the social system and sustained male sovereignty and female oppression. As Mill says, historical circumstances, not natural and intellectual gaps, were the reasons for the creation of male dominance in the world. Historical and cultural contexts that affected gender relationships should be examined while evaluating Mill’s hypothesis. Muscle power can only partially be responsible for the division of labor in ancient civilizations, but women were the earliest victims of oppression. Unlike that, the extreme patriarchal regimes were a result of complicated historical, economic, and cultural processes rather than the simple subjugation of females (Anderson, 2020). Mill’s theory coincides with women’s societal oppression, as argued in feminist theory. Women are considered inferior in various aspects. He brings out historical events to demonstrate that gender roles are altered and society may be transformed. Mill criticizes essentialist gender views as well as puts in history the woman’s role as a subordinate. Mills’ hypothesis conforms to modern gender relationships and the patriarchal studies of history (Anderson, 2020). Women are lagging since the old power imbalances, and societal stereotypes do not reflect gender differences. To tackle the deep-rooted gender inequality and strive for social justice, there should be a recognition of the source of the problem—the historical gender disparity.
- Utilitarian and Kantian Approaches to Women’s Rights
Mills’ utilitarian view of equality between sexes, through an argument that benefits to society are guaranteed when gender equalization takes place, is valid since it maximizes overall utility through happiness. Women should enjoy identical rights to men in pursuing individual freedoms and providing an environment where social cordiality is optimized, and maximum social harmony is achieved. On the contrary, it cannot be doubted that, for a Kantian, a woman’s right view contains an appeal to duty, reason, and autonomy (Juruś, 2023). Based on the categorical imperative, Kantian ethics talks about the moral obligation toward women to be equal to all others, which is embedded in the fact that all individuals are inherently dignified. I regard it as achievable to apply some points of utilitarian and Kantian democracies to women’s rights. Utilitarianism’s emphasis on maximizing welfare runs as a thread through proposals for any social implementation of democratic ideas by evaluating observers’ happiness.
On the contrary, Kantian ethics provides a framework for fundamental human dignity by focusing on intrinsic value without gender inequality (Juruś, 2023). My ethical stand on gender equality as a woman integrates utilitarianism and deontology principles, as I usually choose the all-encompassing option. So, the smooth integration of these ethical approaches enables us to gain an all-sided perception of gender justice and advocate the fundamental reshaping of society accordingly.
- Contemporary Relevance and Progress in Women’s Rights
Assessing Mill’s criticism of the male-dominated social order shows the difficulty of achieving gender balance now. Though progress has been made, inequities and decision powers persist. Although rights and gender issues are more recognized, especially with legal protections, women still face discrimination, assault, and institutional barriers to equality. In politics, business, and academia, where men dominate leadership positions, the culture of male domination and female underrepresentation is evident. Continued gender pay discrepancies lead to economic inequity and financial instability for women. Violence against women is a significant gender safety issue. Recent developments offer promise (Knüfer, 2023). New laws and bills have strengthened legal protection, while non-governmental organizations have created gender equality awareness and assistance activities. The rise of women in senior roles indicates that community inclusion is finally happening. Educational activities that deconstruct gender stereotypes and encourage girls to pursue career education will reduce the academic and career gap. Social media has also become a global forum for gender equality discussions, diverse views, and community building. Progress comes with many challenges, and the evidence is more fair.
Mill’s criticism of the society that has dominated men is equally valid in today’s society. However, lately, there have been advancements in women’s rights, showing that working towards a more universal and equitable society may be viewed as a success. Nevertheless, genuine gender equality needs to be constantly and firmly realized through decentralized anti-patriarchalism, deconstructing gender stereotypes, and fighting for the collateral forms of discrimination. The act of standing up for women and equality between genders is an urge towards the planet of tomorrow, where generations to come will have their voices heard.
References
Connell, S. M. (2021). Aristotle on women: Physiology, psychology, and politics. Cambridge University Press.
Nwanokwai-OGBENEGE, L. DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR THE SEXES IN THE WORKS OF SIMONE DE BEAUVOIR AND IHECHI NKORO.
Knüfer, A. (2023). Gender and Race in John Stuart Mill is The Subjection of Women. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 44(1), 53–79.
Juruś, D. (2023). THE ETHICS OF CARE AS A FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF KANTIANISM, UTILITARIANISM, AND LIBERALISM. Studia Iuridica, (99), 91-104.
Anderson, P. D. (2020). ‘We have the same enemies’: Simone de Beauvoir and the silent feminism of C. Wright Mills. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 21(3), 276–299.