Carole Pateman is one of the leading political theorists writing today. This wide-ranging volume brings together for the first time a selection of her work on democratic theory and feminist criticism of mainstream political theory. The volume includes substantial discussions of problems of democracy, citizenship and the welfare state, including the largely unrecognized difficulties surrounding women's participation. The inclusion of essays from both a mainstream and feminist perspective provides concrete examples of the differences between these two approaches to democracy, to (...) questions of consent and political obligation, and to the relationship between the private and public spheres. This scholarly and highly challenging work will be of interest to students and researchers in political theory, political science, women's studies and sociology. (shrink)

In dit boek over sekse verschillen stelt Eisenstein dat de ongelijkheid tussen de sekse in stand wordt gehouden door zowel het recht, die de man als standaard neemt bij wetgeving die de formele gelijkheid tussen mannen en vrouwen wil regelen, als door het biologische verschil tussen man en vrouw, waardoor vrouwen beperkt worden tot voortplanting en moederschap. Aan de hand van thema's als positieve actie, abortus en pornografie laat ze zien dat het recht beperkend werkt. Zonder terug te vallen in (...) traditionele ideen stelt ze het 'zwangere lichaam' met de gevolgen daarvan, centraal in de discussie over gelijke behandeling. (shrink)

For them, citizenship is by definition a matter of treating people as individuals with equal rights under the law. This is what distinguishes democratic citizenship from feudal and other pre-modern views that determined people's political status by ...

Pateman challenges the way contemporary society functions by questioning the standard interpretation of an idea that is deeply embedded in American and British political thought: that our rights and freedoms derive from the social contract explicated by Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau and interpreted in the United States by the Founding Fathers. The author shows how we are told only half the story of the original contract that establishes modern patriarchy. The sexual contract is ignored and thus men's patriarchal right over (...) women is also glossed over. No attention is paid to the problems that arise when women are excluded from the original contract but incorporated into the new contractual order. One of the main targets of the book is those who try to turn contractarian theory to progressive use, and a major thesis of the book is that this is not possible. Thus those feminists who have looked to a more "proper" contract- one between genuinely equal partners, or one entered into without any coercion- are misleading themselves. In the author's words, "In contract theory universal freedom is always a hypothesis, a story, a political fiction. Contract always generates political right in the forms of domination and subordination." Thus the book is also aimed at mainstream political theorists, and socialist and other critics of contract theory. The author offers a sweeping challenge to conventional understandings- of both left and right- of actual contracts in everyday life: the marriage contract, the employment contract, the prostitution contract, and the new surrogate mother contract. By bringing a feminist perspective to bear on the contradictions and paradoxes surrounding women and contract, and the relation between the sexes, she is able to shed new light on fundamental political problems of freedom and subordination. (shrink)

A liberal society seeks not to impose a single way of life, but to leave its citizens as free as possible to choose their own values and ends. It therefore must govern by principles of justice that do not presuppose any particular vision of the good life. But can any such principles be found? And if not, what are the consequences for justice as a moral and political ideal? These are the questions Michael Sandel takes up in this penetrating critique (...) of contemporary liberalism. Sandel locates modern liberalism in the tradition of Kant, and focuses on its most influential recent expression in the work of John Rawls. In the most important challenge yet to Rawls' theory of justice, Sandel traces the limits of liberalism to the conception of the person that underlies it, and argues for a deeper understanding of community than liberalism allows. (shrink)

A liberal society seeks not to impose a single way of life, but to leave its citizens as free as possible to choose their own values and ends. It therefore must govern by principles of justice that do not presuppose any particular vision of the good life. But can any such principles be found? And if not, what are the consequences for justice as a moral and political ideal? These are the questions Michael Sandel takes up in this penetrating critique (...) of contemporary liberalism. Sandel locates modern liberalism in the tradition of Kant, and focuses on its most influential recent expression in the work of John Rawls. In the most important challenge yet to Rawls' theory of justice, Sandel traces the limits of liberalism to the conception of the person that underlies it, and argues for a deeper understanding of community than liberalism allows. (shrink)

The social boundaries of citizenship involve relations of exclusion and inclusion within the global economy and specific nation-states. A case study of contemporary Canadian federal policy regarding the recruitment and regulation of foreign domestic workers reveals that, despite postwar trends toward liberalization of immigration policy and general advances made by Canadian workers, citizenship rights for third-world female domestics have declined. This apparently "anomalous" non-citizenship status can be better understood through an examination of the social relations and discourses that reproduce conditions (...) of bonded servitude for foreign domestics. It is argued that citizenship must be understood as a variable and unequal process shaped by global realities, state intervention, and racialized, gendered discourses. (shrink)

"Eisenstein argues clearly and forcefully for the importance of reinventing a comprehensive rights discourse through the recognition of individual specified needs."—Donna J. Haraway, University of California, Santa Cruz "Inspired by events in Eastern Europe and building on her earlier, pathbreaking critiques of patriarchy, neoconservatism, and neoliberalism, Eisenstein asks: how shall a white feminist living in the U.S. in the 1990s position herself in a world where so much has changed yet so much remains the same? Her answer, daring and persuasive, (...) steers through the post-1989 debates in Eastern Europe over the meaning of democracy; the searing race-gender controversies of recent U.S. politics—the Gulf War, AIDS, abortion, affirmative action, the Hill-Thomas hearings; and finally to the conclusion that we must radically redefine, not reject, liberal concepts like "rights," "equality," and "privacy."—Rosalind P. Petchesky, Hunter College, author of Abortion and Woman's Choice. (shrink)