Abstract
Women continue to be in charge of most childrearing; men continue to be responsible for most
breadwinning. There is no consensus on whether this state of affairs, and the informal norms that
encourage it, are matters of justice to be tackled by state action. Feminists have criticized political
liberalism for its alleged inability to embrace a full feminist agenda, inability explained by political
liberals’ commitment to the ideal of state neutrality. The debate continues on whether neutral states
can accommodate two feminist demands: to enact policies aimed at dismantling the feminization of
caregiving, especially childrearing, and to compensate women for some of the disadvantages they
incur by being primary care-givers. I contribute to this debate with three arguments in support of
policies meant to de-gender care-giving and compensate care-givers. The first appeals to equality of
opportunity to positions of advantage and justifies policies that prevent or mitigate statistical
discrimination and implicit biases. The second draws attention to a possible causal relationship
between the specialization of women in early childcare and misogyny; since the latter is
incompatible with political liberal justice, it yields the conclusion that political liberals ought to
further investigate the causal hypothesis with the aim of establishing or refuting it. The third
argument concludes that legitimate childrearing prohibits adults from socializing children or, at
least girls, into gender norms; it justifies duties of justice on the side of parents, educators, and
economic agents, and state policies meant to offset foreseeable breaches of some of these duties.