Feminist Legal Studies

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 199–226 | Cite as

The Ethic of Care, Female Subjectivity and Feminist Legal Scholarship

  • Maria Drakopoulou

Abstract

The object of this essay is to explore the central role played by the ‘ethic of care’ in debates within and beyond feminist legal theory. The author claims that the ethic of care has attracted feminist legal scholars in particular, as a means of resolving the theoretical, political and strategic difficulties to which the perceived ‘crisis of subjectivity’ in feminist theory has given rise. She argues that feminist legal scholars are peculiarly placed in relation to this crisis because of their reliance on the social ‘woman’ whose interests are the predominant concern of feminist legal engagement. With the problematisation of subjectivity, the object of feminist legal attention disappears and it is in attempts to deflect the negative political consequences of this that the ethic of care has been invoked, the author argues, unsuccessfully. The essay concludes with suggestions as to how the feminist project in law might proceed in the wake of the crisis of subjectivity and the failure of the ethic of care to resolve it.

academic feminism care crisis of subjectivity ethic of care feminist legal scholarship Gilligan relational jurisprudence subjectitivity woman women 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Allen, H., “One Law for all Reasonable Persons?”, International Journal of the Sociology of Law 16 (1988), 419-432.Google Scholar
  2. Auerbach, J. et al., “Commentary On Gilligan's In a Different Voice”, Feminist Studies 11/1 (1985), 149-161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baier, A., “What Do Women Want in Moral Theory?”, Nous 19 (1985), 53-63.Google Scholar
  4. Baier, A., “Hume, the Women's Moral Theorist?” in Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Fedder Kittay and D. Meyers (Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 37-55.Google Scholar
  5. Baier, A., “Trust and Antitrust” in Moral Prejudices Essays on Ethics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994), 95-129.Google Scholar
  6. Bartlett, K., “Feminist Legal Methods”, Harvard Law Review 100 (1990), 829-888.Google Scholar
  7. Benhabib, S., “The Generalized and the Concrete Other: The Kohlberg-Gilligan Controversy and Feminist Theory”, in Feminism as Critique: Essays on the Politics of Gender in Late Capitalist Societies, ed. S. Benhabib and D. Cornell (Oxford: Polity Press, 1987), 77-95.Google Scholar
  8. Bottomley, A., Gibson, S. and Meteyards, B., “Dworkin, Which Dworkin? Taking Feminism Seriously”, in Critical Legal Studies, ed. P. Fitzpatrick and A. Hunt (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987), 47-60.Google Scholar
  9. Bottomley, A. and Conaghan, J., “Feminist Theory and Legal Strategy”, in Feminist Theory and Legal Strategy, ed. A. Bottomley and J. Conaghan (Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd., 1993), 1-5.Google Scholar
  10. Braidotti, R., “The Subject in Feminism”, Hypatia 6/2 (1991), 155-172.Google Scholar
  11. Brophy, J. and Smart, C. “Locating Law: A Discussion of the Place of Law in Feminist Politics”, in Women in Law: Explorations in Law, Family and Sexuality, ed. J. Brophy and C. Smart (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985), 1-20.Google Scholar
  12. Brunt, R. et al., “Sell-out or Challenge? The Contradiction of a Masters in Women's Studies”, Women's Studies International Forum 6/3 (1983), 283-290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bridgeman, J., “Criminalising the One who Really Cared”, Feminist Legal Studies 6/2 (1998), 245-256.Google Scholar
  14. Butler, J., “Gender Trouble, Feminist Theory, and Psychoanalytic Discourse”, in Feminism/Postmodernism, ed. L.J. Nicholson (London: Routledge, 1990), 324-340.Google Scholar
  15. Caine, P.A., “Feminist Jurisprudence: Grounding the Theories”, Berkeley Women's Law Journal 4/2 (1989), 191-214.Google Scholar
  16. Carty, T., “Post-Modern Law”, in Post-Modern Law, Enlightenment, Revolution and the Death of Man, ed. T. Carty (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1990), 1-39.Google Scholar
  17. Clement, G., Care, Autonomy, and Justice (Boulder: Westview Press, 1998), 135 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Collins, P., “Toward an Afrocentric Feminist Epistemology”, in Black Feminist Thought Vol. 2, (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1992), 201-220.Google Scholar
  19. de Lauretis, T., “Feminist Studies/Critical Studies: issues terms and contexts”, in Feminist Studies. Critical Studies, ed. T. de Lauretis (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), 1-19.Google Scholar
  20. De Lauretis, T., “The Essence of the Triangle or, Taking the Risk of Essentialism Seriously: Feminist Theory in Italy, the U.S., and Britain”, in The Essential Difference, ed. N. Schor and E. Weed (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 1-39.Google Scholar
  21. Davis, K., “Toward a Feminist Rhetoric: the Gilligan debate revisited”, Women's Studies International Forum 15/2 (1992), 219-231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dietz, M.G., “Context Is All: Feminism and Theories of Citizenship”, Daedalus 116 (1987) 1-24.Google Scholar
  23. Drakopoulou, M., “Moralità della cura, differenza sessuale e teoria femminista”, Iride 8 (1992), 152-164.Google Scholar
  24. Drakopoulou, M., “Postmodernism and Smart's Feminist Critical Project in Law, Crime and Sexuality”, Feminist Legal Studies V/1 (1997), 107-119.Google Scholar
  25. DuBois, E. et al., Feminist Scholarship: Kindling in the Groves of Academy (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1985).Google Scholar
  26. DuBois, E., Dunlap, M., Gillligan, C., MacKinnon, C. and Menkel-Meadow, C., “Feminist Discourse, Moral Values, and the Law-A Conversation”, Buffalo Law Review 34/1 (1985a), 11-87.Google Scholar
  27. Evans, M., “In Praise of Theory”, in Theories of Women's Studies, ed. G. Bowles and R. Duelli Klein (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983), 219-228.Google Scholar
  28. Eugene, T.M., “Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child: the Call and Response for a Liberational Ethic of Care by Black Feminists”, in Who Cares? Theory, Research and Educational Implications of the Ethic of Care, ed. M. M. Brabeck (New York: Praeger, 1989), 45-62.Google Scholar
  29. Feder Kittay, E., Love's Labor Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency (New York: Routledge 1999), 238 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Finley, L., “Transcending Equality Theory: A Way out of the Maternity and Workplace Debate”, Columbia Law Review 86 (1986), 1118-1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fisher, B. and Tronto, J., “Toward a Feminist Theory of Caring”, in Circles of Care: Work and Identity in Women's Llives, ed. E.K. Abel and M.K. Nelson (Albany: University of New York Press, 1990), 35-62.Google Scholar
  32. Flynn, L. and Lawson, A., “Gender, Sexuality and the Doctrine of Detrimental Reliance”, Feminist Legal Studies 3/1 (1995), 105-121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fox, M., “A Woman's Right to Choose? A Feminist Critique”, in The Future of Human Reproduction, ed. J. Harris and S. Holm (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 77-100.Google Scholar
  34. Frug, M.J., “A Postmodern Feminist Legal Manifesto (An Unfinished Draft)”, Harvard Law Review 105 (1992), 1045-1075.Google Scholar
  35. Gilligan, C., “In a Different Voice: Women's Conceptions of Self and Morality”, Harvard Educational Review 47 (1977), 481-517.Google Scholar
  36. Gilligan, C., In a Different Voice (Cambridge Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982), 184 pp.Google Scholar
  37. Gilligan, C., “Reply”, SIGNS 11/2 (1986), 324-333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gilligan, C., “Moral Orientation and Moral Development”, in Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Kittay and D. Meyers (Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 19-33.Google Scholar
  39. Gilligan, C., Lyons, N. and Hanmer, T., Making Connections: The Relational Worlds of Adolescent Girls at Emma Willard School (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1990), 334 pp.Google Scholar
  40. Gilligan, C., “Hearing the Difference: Theorizing Connection”, Hypatia 10/2 (1995), 120-127.Google Scholar
  41. Gilligan, C., et al. Between Voice and Silence Women and Girls, Race and Relationship (Cambridge Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1997), 253 pp.Google Scholar
  42. Grosz, E., “What is Feminist Theory?”, in Feminist Challenges, ed. C. Pateman and E. Gross (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 190-204.Google Scholar
  43. Grosz, E., “Feminist Theory and Challenge to Knowledge”, Women's Studies International Forum 10 (1987), 475-480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Grosz, E., “Sexual Difference and the Problem of Essentialism”, in The Essential Difference, ed. N. Schor and E. Weed (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994), 82-97.Google Scholar
  45. Grbich, J., “Feminist Jurisprudence as Women's Studies in Law: Australian Dialogues”, in Women's Rights and the Rights of Man, ed. A.J. Arnaud and E. Kingdom (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1990), 75-87.Google Scholar
  46. Harding, S., “The Curious Coincidence of Feminine and African Moralities”, in Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Feder Kittay and D.T. Meyers (Totowa NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 296-315.Google Scholar
  47. Harris, A.P., “Race and Essentialism in Feminist Legal Theory”, Stanford Law Review 42 (1990), 581-616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Harvey, C.J., “Engendering Asylum Law: Feminism, Process and Practice”, in Feminist Perspectives on Public Law, ed. S. Millns and N. Whitty (London: Cavendish, 1999), 211-243.Google Scholar
  49. Hasse, L., “Legalizing Gender-Specific Values”, in Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Feder Kittay and D.T. Meyers (Totowa: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 282-296.Google Scholar
  50. Held, V., “Feminism and Moral Theory” in, Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Feder Kittay and D.T. Meyers (Totowa NJ.: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 111-128.Google Scholar
  51. Held, V., Feminist Morality Transforming Culture, Society, and Politics (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1993), 281 pp.Google Scholar
  52. Hekman, S.J., Moral Voices, Moral Selves (Oxford: Polity Press, 1995), 188 pp.Google Scholar
  53. Heyes, C.J., “Anti-Essentialism in Practice: Carol Gilligan and Feminist Philosophy”, Hypatia 12/3 (1997), 142-163.Google Scholar
  54. Hilkert Andolsen, B. et al., Women's Consciousness, Women's Conscience (San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1987), 310 pp.Google Scholar
  55. Irigaray, L., “Equal to Whom?”, Differences 1/2 (1989), 59-76.Google Scholar
  56. Kaye, M., “Equity's Treatment of Sexually Transmitted Debt”, Feminist Legal Studies V/1 (1997), 35-55.Google Scholar
  57. Kaplan, L., “Woman as Caretaker: An Archetype that Supports Patriarchal Militarism”, Hypatia 9/2 (1994), 123-133.Google Scholar
  58. Kerber, L. et al., “On In a Different Voice: An Interdisciplinary Forum”, SIGNS 11/2 (1986), 304-333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kingdom, E., “Legal Recognition of a Woman's Right to Choose”, in Women in Law, ed. J. Brophy and C. Smart (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985), 143-160.Google Scholar
  60. Kline, M., “Race, Racism and Feminist Legal Theory”, Harvard Women's Law Journal 3 (1989), 115-150.Google Scholar
  61. Kohlberg, L. and Krammer, R., “Continuities and Discontinuities in Childhood and Adult Moral Development”, Human Development 12 (1969), 93-120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kohlberg, L. and Gilligan, C., “The Adolescence as a Philosopher: The discovery of the self in a postconventional world”, Daedalus 100 (1971), 1051-1056.Google Scholar
  63. Kohlberg, L., “Moral Stages and Moralization: The Cognitive-Developmental Approach”, in Moral Development and Behaviour: Theory, Research and Social Issues, ed. T. Lickona (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1976), 12-41.Google Scholar
  64. Kohlberg, L., The Philosophy of Moral Development (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981).Google Scholar
  65. Komter, A.E., “Justice, Friendship and Care”, The European Journal of Women's Studies 2 (1995), 151-169.Google Scholar
  66. Kroeger-Mappes, J., “The Ethic of Care vis-à-vis the Ethic of Rights: A Problem of Contemporary Moral Theory”, Hypatia 9/3 (1994), 108-133.Google Scholar
  67. Langland, E. and Gove, W., A Feminist Perspective in the Academy (Chicago: University Chicago Press, 1981).Google Scholar
  68. Littleton, C.A., “In Search of a Feminist Jurisprudence”, Harvard Women's Law Journal 10 (1987), 1-7.Google Scholar
  69. Littleton, C.A., “Reconstructing Sexual Equality”, California Law Review 75 (1987a), 1279-1337.Google Scholar
  70. Mackenzie, R., “From Sanctity to Screening: Genetic Disabilities, Risk and Rhetorical Strategies in Wrongful Birth and Conception Cases' Feminist Legal Studies 7/2 (1999), 175-191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Mansbridge, J., “Feminism and Democratic Community”, in Feminist Ethics, ed. M. Gatens (Ashgate: Dartmouth, 1998), 339-395.Google Scholar
  72. Martin, J.R., “Methodological Essentialism, False Difference, and Other Dangerous Traps”, Signs 19/3 (1994), 630-657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. McCann, K., “Battered Women and the Law: The Limits of Legislation”, in Women in Law: Explorations in Law, Family and Sexuality, ed. J. Brophy and C. Smart (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985), 71-96.Google Scholar
  74. McGlynn, C., “Judging Women Differently: Gender, the Judiciary and Reform”, in Feminist Perspectives on Public Law, ed. S. Millns and N. Whitty (London: Cavendish, 1999), 87-106.Google Scholar
  75. Menkel-Meadow, C.J., “Portia in a Different Voice: Speculations on aWomen's Lawyering Process”, Berkeley Women's Law Journal 1 (1985), 39-63.Google Scholar
  76. Minow, M., Making All the Difference Inclusion, Exclusion, and American Law (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990), 403 pp.Google Scholar
  77. Minow, M. and Shanley, M., “Relational Rights and Responsibilities: Revisioning the Family in Liberal Political Theory and Law”, Hypatia 11/1 (1996), 4-29.Google Scholar
  78. Mitchell, J., “Women and Equality”, in The Rights and Wrongs of Women, ed. J. Mitchell and A. Oakley (London: Penguin Books, 1983), 379-399.Google Scholar
  79. Naffine, N., Law and the Sexes: Explorations in Feminist Jurisprudence,(Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1990), 1770 pp.Google Scholar
  80. Noddings, N., Caring: A Feminist Approach to Ethics and Moral Education (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 216 pp.Google Scholar
  81. Noddings, N., Women and Evil (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  82. Olsen, F., “Statutory Rape: A Feminist Critique of Rights Analysis”, Texas Law Review 63/3 (1984), 387-432.Google Scholar
  83. Pankhurst, E., Speech from the Dock, 21st October 1908.Google Scholar
  84. Piaget, J., The Moral Judgement of the Child (New York: The Free Press, 1932/1965), 418.Google Scholar
  85. Rich, A., “The Dream of a Common Language”, in Poems 1974-1977 (New York: W.W. Norton, 1978).Google Scholar
  86. Rifkin, J., “Towards a Feminist Jurisprudence”, Harvard Women's Law Journal 3 (1980), 83-95.Google Scholar
  87. Riley, D., Am I That Name? (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), 126 pp.Google Scholar
  88. Ruddick S., “Maternal Thinking”, Feminist Studies 6/2 (1980), 342-367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Ruddick S., “Remarks on the Sexual Politics of Reason”, in Women and Moral Theory, ed. E. Feder Kittay and D.T. Meyers (Totowa NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 1987), 237-260.Google Scholar
  90. Ruddick S., Maternal Thinking Towards a Politics of Peace (London: The Women's Press, 1989), 297 pp.Google Scholar
  91. Sandland, R., “Between 'Truth' and 'Difference'?: Poststructuralism, Law and the Power of Feminism”, Feminist Legal Studies 3/1 (1995), 1-47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Scales, A.C., “The Emergence of Feminist Jurisprudence: An Essay”, Yale Law Journal 95 (1986), 1373-1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Scott, J.W., “Deconstructing Equality versus Difference: Or the Uses of Postructuralist Theory for Feminism”, Feminist Studies 14/1 (1988), 33-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Sevenhuijsen, S., “Fatherhood and the Political Theory of Rights: Theoretical Perspectives of Feminism”, International Journal of the Sociology of Law 14 (1986), 329-340.Google Scholar
  95. Sevenhuijsen, S., “Justice, Moral Reasoning and the Politics of Child Custody”, in Equality Politics and Gender, ed.W. Meehan and S. Sevenhuijsen (London: Sage, 1991), 88-103.Google Scholar
  96. Sevenhuijsen, S., Citizenship and the Ethics of Care (London: Routledge, 1998), 198 pp.Google Scholar
  97. Sheridan, S., “Feminist Knowledge, Women's Liberation, and Women's Studies”, in Feminist Knowledge, ed. S. Gunew (London: Routledge, 1990), 36-55.Google Scholar
  98. Smart, C., The Ties that Bind (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), 273 pp.Google Scholar
  99. Smart, C., Feminism and the Power of Law (London: Routledge, 1989), 180 pp.Google Scholar
  100. Smart, C., “The Woman of Legal Discourse”, Social and Legal Studies 1 (1992), 29-44.Google Scholar
  101. Smart, C., Law, Crime and Sexuality: Essays in Feminism, (London: Sage Publications, 1995).Google Scholar
  102. Smart, C. and Neale, B., “Good Enough Morality: Divorce and Postmodernity”, Critical Social Policy 17/4 (1997), 3-27.Google Scholar
  103. Smart, C. and Neale, B., Family Fragments? (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999), 222 pp.Google Scholar
  104. Spender, D., Men's Studies Modified: The Impact of Feminism on the Academic Disciplines (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1981).Google Scholar
  105. Spivak, G., “Criticism, Feminism and the Institution”, Thesis Eleven 10/11 (1984), 175-188.Google Scholar
  106. Stang-Dahl, T., Women's Law: An Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
  107. Stubbs, M., “Feminism and Legal Positivism”, Australian Journal of Law and Society 3 (1986), 63-91.Google Scholar
  108. Thornhill, E., “Focus on Black Women”, Canadian Journal of Women and Law 1 (1985), 153-175.Google Scholar
  109. Thornton, M., “Feminist Jurisprudence: Illusion or Reality?”, Australian Journal of Law and Society 3 (1986), 5-29.Google Scholar
  110. Tronto, J.C., “Care as Basis for Radical Political Judgement”, Hypatia 10/2 (1995), 141-149.Google Scholar
  111. Tronto, J.C., Caring for Democracy: A Feminist Vision (Utrecht: Universiteit voor Humanistiek, 1995a).Google Scholar
  112. Tronto, J.C., Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care (London: Routledge, 1993), 226 pp.Google Scholar
  113. Vogel, L., “Debating Difference: Feminism, Pregnancy, and the Workplace”, Feminist Studies 16/1 (1990), 9-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Walker, L., “Sex Differences in the Development of Moral Reasoning: A Critical Review of the Literature”, Child Development 55/3 (1984), 677-691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Wallbank, J., “Returning the Subject to the Subject of Women's Poverty”, Feminist Legal Studies 3/2 (1995), 207-221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. West, R., “The Difference in Women's Hedonic Lives: A Phenomenological Critique of Feminist Legal Theory”, Wisconsin Women's Law Journal 3 (1987), 81-145.Google Scholar
  117. West, R., “Jurisprudence and Gender”, The University of Chicago Law Review 55/1 (1988), 1-72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Wightman, J., “Intimate Relationships, Relational Contract Theory, and the Reach of Contract”, Feminist Legal Studies 8/1 (2000), 93-131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Wiskik, H., “To Question Everything: The Enquiries of Feminist Jurisprudence”, Berkeley Women's Law Journal 1 (1986), 64-77.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Drakopoulou
    • 1
  1. 1.Kent Law SchoolEliot College, University of KentCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations