Kinnaird College for Women

FINAL PROJECT
Moral Philosophy

Topic - FEMINISM

Submitted by:
Aimen Nawaz
Fatima Farooq
Komal Sohail
Tooba Tauqir
Zainab Noor

Submitted to:
Miss Hadiqa Atif

Date of Submission:
6th April, 2020
Feminism - a philosophical theory that observes justice for women that is
manifested worldwide, represented by various institutions committed to
activity on behalf of women’s right and interests.

ABSTRACT

Feminism incorporates multiple ideas into philosophy including not particularly a variety
of political and moral objections, but ways of questioning and answering many statements. It is
obvious that no topic is more central to feminist philosophy than gender or sex. The term,
"Feminism" when heard, the two terms, particularly "sex" and "gender" comes in one's mind.
However, even under this, there lies variations in the theme. It includes critical and constructive
dialogues with mainstream philosophical views that also involves newer topics which are
inquired. This paper focuses on the 'Theory of Feminism'. The paper begins with an introduction
to the term, "Feminism" followed by a detailed overview of this philosophical theory relating to
the women. The theory has also been criticized on multiple aspects, that too have been covered
in this paper. It, thus, also includes a detailed conclusion.

Keywords: Philosophy, Feminism, Theory, Approach, Criticism, Womanhood, Gender, Sex,

Discrimination, Equality, Rights
INTRODUCTION
Feminism, the belief in social, economic, and political equality of the sexes. Although
largely originating in the West, feminism is manifested worldwide and is represented by various
institutions committed to activity on behalf of women’s right and interests.

Throughout most of Western history, women were confined to the domestic sphere, while
public life was reserved for men. In medieval Europe, women were denied the right to own
property, to study, or to participate in public life. At the end of the 19th century in France, they
were still compelled to cover their heads in public, and, in parts of Germany, a husband still had
the right to sell his wife. Even as late as the early 20th century, women could neither vote nor
hold elective office in Europe and in most of the United States (where several territories and
states granted women’s suffrage long before the federal government did so). Women were
prevented from conducting business without a male representative, be it father, brother, husband,
legal agent, or even son. Married women could not exercise control over their own children
without the permission of their husbands. Moreover, women had little or no access to education
and were barred from most professions. In some parts of the world, such restrictions on women
continue today.

In 1919, thousands of women stood outside the White House and demanded that they be
allowed to vote. In the next presidential election. And this massive demographic shift paved the
way to laws in the 1920s that would promote women’s health and education

In the 1960s and 70s feminist protests resulted in a series of laws that guaranteed, under
the law, equal rights in the workplace, in universities and colleges, in health care, and in the
home.

And in the early 2000s, feminists valiantly fought against such oppressive forces as the
word “too”, scary sports mascots, and patriarchal cereal boxes.

The feminist movement is usually broken up into three waves. The first wave in the late
19th and early 20th centuries pushed for political equality. The second wave, in the 1960s and
70s, pushed for legal and professional equality. And the third wave, in the past couple decades,
has pushed for social equality.
 The history of feminism is filled with radicals and progressives and liberals and centrists.
It’s filled with sharp movements and reactionary counter-movements. That’s part of what it
means to be both an intellectual tradition and a social movement, and right now feminism is
functioning as both with a gorgeous and monumental vitality. Rather than devouring their own,
feminists should recognize the enormous work that each wave has done for the movement, and
get ready to keep doing more work

MAIN BODY
Before talking about feminism and its role in ethics, society and religion alike, we will
look into the history of feminism and how it evolved over the years to come to what it has
become now in modern times. The discussion will be arranged in the following manner: starting
with the developing of the basic word feminism and how it came to be them how the concept of
feminism spread and why it was needed in the first place. Then we with discuss how the idea
evolved over time with respect to the change of time and culture and globalization of culture.
Then lastly the role feminism plays in morality and the teachings of Islam with respect to the
teachings and beliefs will be explained.

The origin of feminism

The word feminism is the basically originates for the Latin word “femina” which means
women’s issues/problems. The word was first used in the journal “La Citoyenne as La Feminitè”
by Hunburtine Auclert in the late 1880’s. this was in France and in the article she tried to
criticize the male dominance in the society and how women are given little to no rights in
society. This was in context to the promises made in the French Revolution.

The word was used in English for the first time in 1910’s by the British and then in
America in 1920’s. in Arabic it was used as “Niswia” later on. Feminism was also the topic of
the movie “woman of the year” which was released in 1942. Feminism gained a wide spread
acknowledgment late in the 1970’s which marks the beginning of the second wave. In the time
line given below we can see the use of the mere word in different languages to express the
difficulties for women in society.

Late 19th
century 1980's
1960's to
and early till
70's
20th present
centuryThe first wave. the second wave the third wave

All through a large portion of Western history, women were kept to the domestic circle,
while public life was saved for men. In medieval Europe, women were denied the option to claim
property, to contemplate, or to take an interest in public life. Toward the finish of the nineteenth
century in France, they were still constrained to cover their heads in public, and, in parts of
Germany, a spouse despite everything reserved the option to sell his significant other. Indeed,
even as late as the mid twentieth century, women could neither vote nor hold elective office in
Europe and in a large portion of the United States (where a few regions and states conceded
women's suffrage well before the government did as such).

Women were kept from leading business without a male representative, be it father,
sibling, spouse, lawful operator, or even child. Hitched women couldn't exercise control over
their own youngsters without the authorization of their spouses. Besides, women had practically
zero access to instruction and were banished from most professions. In certain pieces of the
world, such limitations on women proceed with today.

There is scant evidence of early organized protest against such circumscribed status. In the
3rd century BCE, Roman women filled the Capitoline Hill and blocked every entrance to the
Forum when consul Marcus Porcius Cato resisted attempts to repeal laws limiting women’s use
of expensive goods. “If they are victorious now, what will they not attempt?” Cato cried. “As
soon as they begin to be your equals, they will have become your superiors.”. marks the first
attempt at female equality that was first seen in Greece, though the ides and concept of feminism
dates back to the 15th century, the most prominent times were all divided into 3 different waves
by scholars and writers. The first that took place in the 19 th century and progressed into the early
20th century was an attempt and fight for the right to vote. Back then women were not provided
with the privilege of voting. This moment started in the UK and the US and ended in success
gaining all women over the age of 21 the right to vote.

This ended the first wave but the second wave was not too far behind as it started in the
1960’s and progressed to the 1970’s. the main aim in this wave was to win women legal and
social rights in society. However, this wave did not end with a prosperous outcome. As women
were not awarded the right for which the companied.

The third wave was a more refined and more powerful version of the second wave that
fights for the same rights but with a more advanced society. The third wave started in the 1980’s
and is ongoing till today. With its presence still we can easily confirm that the efforts are still to
bring fruit. Looking to the implementations from a political stand point the most recent event that
can be related to the degree of male dominance exhibited in society is the results of America’s
recent elections. In which Donald Trump was voted President while majority of the voters were
not happy with the results and after math of the elections. Even in our own country of Pakistan
the involvement of women in politics and law is not something that brings pride to the
community.

Looking at it from the stand point of morality Feminist Ethics points "to comprehend,
criticize, and right" how gender works inside our ethical convictions and practices (Lindemann
2005, 11) and our methodological ways to deal with moral hypothesis. All the more explicitly,
feminist ethicists mean to comprehend, criticize, and right: (1) the binary perspective on gender,
(2) the benefit truly accessible to men, or potentially (3) the ways that sees about gender keep up
abusive social orders or practices that harm others, particularly young ladies and ladies who truly
have been subjected, along gendered dimensions including sexuality and gender-character.

Since abuse regularly includes disregarding the points of view of the underestimated,
various ways to deal with feminist ethics share for all intents and purpose a pledge to all the
more likely comprehend the encounters of people oppressed in gendered ways. That dedication
brings about a propensity, in feminist ethics, to consider empirical data and material actualities.
 When the question for equal human rights arises in morality and the fact about not using
humans as a means to an end. The aspect that covers women in the participation of equal rights is
omitted for the legal and even domestic standpoint. In most cultures women were merely seen a
means to an end which was either reproduction or the happiness of men. This defied the main
idea of ethics which was equal rights for all. On the off chance that we can comprehend what
makes a general public capacity harmoniously from the perspective of science, we should
surrender Iron Age philosophical tracts keeping humankind down. Some portion of the issue may
very well be that ethical requests were chosen for such a significant number of centuries by men.

‘Islamic feminism’ is a relatively recent current of thought being developed by a

transnational network of activists in widely contrasting socio-political contexts. Islamic feminist
are concerned with developing an ethical reading of the bases of Islam, namely the Qur’an and
the Sunna, in order to find a form of religious exegesis that will support their feminist viewpoint.
It is therefore legitimate to speak of the production of a new Islamic discourse and, in general
terms, of the appropriation of the religious.

Islamic women's activists are completing a basic survey of old style commentaries to
Islamic sources and giving new translations of the last focused on socio-political and monetary
uniformity with men. They take a dynamic, gendered approach that associates statutes contained
in ahadith – the words and activities of Muhammad recorded by his initial supporters – to the
social and political setting of 'disclosure', as opposed to any concordance with an as far as
anyone knows ageless 'message' and its optimal of fairness and social equity.

By historicizing the sources right now, relativize their legitimate outcomes, in this way
deconstructing the authenticity of the conventional 'man centric settlement solidified as certain
key ideas, for example, that of qiwâma (male matchless quality).
CRITICISM
We acknowledge the contribution of feminists in reducing social injustice. Today, due to
the effort of feminism, women are more appreciated and wealthier than they used to be in the
past. More women stand out today in all spheres of life showing their hidden talents for the
development of our society. Therefore, society in this last decade has benefited enormously from
the efforts of women, thanks to the feminist campaign. However, despite the apparent
contributions of feminism to the development of society, it is not without its critics. These
criticisms are as follows:

Feminism does not have a sound basis

The central belief on which feminism built its argument is that both male and female
gender are equal. Because they are equal by nature, they share the same rights and privileges.
But the question arises on what is the basis on which we say that the male and female genders
are equal. Are they the same because they share the same human nature? If this is so, then
animals could also claim to be equal to humans, as they share the same "animal behavior" with
humans. Even stones and other non-living beings could claim equality as they share the same
existence with humans. If feminists are correct in saying that both sexes are the same because
they share the same nature; the same argument could be used to justify our equality with animals,
plants, and non-living things. This feminist argument is clearly flawed, since the conclusion does
not follow from the premises, sharing the same nature does not eliminate equality. Where then
lies the basis of feminists claim for equality; If we think rationally, animals could also point to
something like the sensitivity they share in common with humans as the basis for equality, and
stones could also do the same. Although the masculine and feminine gender share some
characteristics in common; that doesn't make them the same. The animal and the human also
share many characteristics in common that do not equal them either as some animal rights
activists claim. The conclusion derived here is that feminists do not have a solid basis for their
arguments for equality. Furthermore, if there is no basis for the claim for equality, then there can
be no basis for feminists' agitation for equal opportunity. How can opportunities be equal if we
are not equal? Therefore, feminists are challenged to provide a sound rational basis for their
claims.

The demand for equal opportunities in itself is an access of inequality

An equal does not beg to be equal his equality would shine for all to see. The male and
female were created the same time, how come it is the female who is struggling to be equal. Why
was it the female that was subjugated and not the s? And why was this scenario obvious in all
societies of the world? Why it was that females was dominated in all societies of the world? It is
clear that the male has something inbuilt in them that make them occupy the position they take in
any relationship they enter with the female. It is a belief that even if the world should be
destroyed and recreated, the male would still rise and dominate the female. This is because,
although men and women share the same substance (nature), they differ in accidents
(characteristics). It is this accidental difference that gives the man the influence on the woman.
Nature created man freer than woman. The woman is subject to many restrictions such as;
menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, parenting. Therefore, as long as the females continue to
carry these chains around them, they can never claim to be completely equal to the male. No
wonder some well-known feminists refuse marriage in order to avoid subjugation. This actually
has little effect, because the man would still have an advantage over the woman, even if there are
no marriages that limit the woman. This advantage would come from the instinctive strength that
a man has over a woman. This force enables a man to do many things that a woman cannot do.
Therefore, whether the chains that limit a woman are removed, she may still find herself
struggling to reach the man as a result of differences in strength between the sexes.

Feminism demands are too extravagant

Feminists demand equal economic, political, and social opportunities for the male and
female sexes. This seems to be contrary to the design of nature; because it was not for nothing
that she gave the male gender more potential, she needed to take the lead in the fight to acquire
these opportunities. The gift of this nature to man is actually the reason why men dominate these
opportunities, even when both sexes were created at the same time. From the beginning of time,
these opportunities were open and equal for all sexes, therefore, it is clear that man reached his
current position now through the great design of nature. Even when the opportunities are equal, a
man because he is more gifted by nature always wins a race, no matter how much the rest runs. If
we critically observe the male and female sexes, we will discover the intention of nature for each
of them.

For each of the sexes, nature has assigned a main role. The woman has been assigned
reproductive duties; this is evident from the playback functions it is equipped with. The woman
is shaped in such a way that she has to carry a baby for nine months before delivery. After
delivery, she would be confined for several months breastfeeding the baby. From this disposition
of nature it is clear that economic activities would not be the main responsibility of women.
Nature would not have wanted this for her and, at the same time, would restrict her with both
pregnancy and parenting. If nature had intended this to be her primary duty, then she would have
shaped her like some animals that would give birth and in a few minutes the baby would be
strong and need little or no parental care. Unlike these animals, the human baby needs constant
care for several years before he can be independent. And without being partial, it is clearly the
intention of nature that this upbringing is the main responsibility of women. Being endowed with
the mammary gland is a clear sign that nature intends to take care of the baby. It is rationally
impossible for her to take good care of her baby and still take economic activities as her primary
responsibility. Since nature has not made the female in such a way that she is capable throughout
the day of being economically active, then it is clear that it is the male who has been entrusted
with this responsibility as his primary duty.

The man is free and is not inhibited by nature and, therefore, is able to maintain himself
and the woman in their point of inactivity. If this is so, why would feminists want to thwart the
design of nature by demanding an equal share in the primary responsibility that has been
entrusted to men? This demand for equal economic opportunities is simply outrageous, is it
justified? At most, they may require participation in economic opportunities and not equal
participation in them. This equal opportunity lawsuit would require an employer entering the
business to make a profit, not have the right to select employees who best guarantee the
achievement of that dream. Why should you be forced to give women equal opportunities, when
we all know that women are unlikely to give the same result as men? The chains that a woman
catches, as we have already discussed, would be established, decreasing her production. For
example, when a woman gives birth, the employer would be forced to give her maternity leave
for a few months. Isn't this a waste of work hours? Whoever bears the cost of this loss, the
employer. Is this loss justified by the employer? Is it justified for a woman to receive the same
salary as the man, even when it is obvious that the man contributes more work? It seems to me
that man is not treated just here.

Feminists appear to have pushed women into the position of advantage over men with
respect to work and pay. However, even if (as is already being done in the world) economic
opportunities open up and become equal for everyone, female people still could not compete
equally with men due to the accidental advantage that a man has been gifted by nature on
women. The natural chains worn by women would always drag her back. The freedom that man
possesses plus his superior brute force would still make him economically superior. This is made
clear by the fact that, while it exists today, that the equal economic opportunity feminists have
always longed for, men remain the most economically vibrant - a list of the world's richest
people would demonstrate this. For a woman to be completely financially equal to a man, she
would need to give up her femininity. The same is true of political and social equality. Since
women may not be economically equal to men, they also cannot be politically equal to men. This
is because political power is largely derived from economic power and, to some extent, from
military power. Men have more economic power than women and, of course, more physical
power. Maybe that's why in Nigeria; No woman has won a governor's election since the start of
democracy in 1999, even when political opportunities are open freely and equally to all sexes.
The demand for equal economic and political opportunities seems to me a demand that will
never be met, no matter how difficult it is for feminists to struggle to understand it. This demand
implies fair competition for the opportunities available to both sexes: men are more likely to win
the competition due to the advantages (freedom and strength) that nature has blessed them.

Feminism is indirectly a shot at the woman

Feminism claims to be fighting for women's rights, but when these rights are achieved, it
will be women who will lose. The patriarchal structure of society is said to limit not only
women; It is far more damaging to men. Patriarchy demands too much of the males, leading
them to take more risks than the females; This risk translates into more death for men than for
women. In Africa, for example, a young man is expected to pay the bride price and provide funds
for traditional and church weddings. You would be expected to own a house and perhaps a car.
He would have to provide a decent life for his family; pay school fees and other bills. All this for
an average Nigerian are not things that are easily achievable. Therefore, the average man in
Africa would have to work very hard to achieve this. And on many occasions, (no matter how
hard you work), many of them fail to do this, causing them to resort to gun theft, kidnapping,
bombing, and other risky and dehumanizing ways to get money. Some die while trying to obtain
this money, others are mutilated, and others suffer from one or more illnesses that result from
frustrations and worries. It is believed that if feminists work hard to achieve equality for all
genders, then this tension in men would be reduced. At least the feminist would soon realize that
one of the main causes of her subjugation by men is the bride price system. The man sees
himself as the head of the family and the woman as someone below him, since he is the one who
made the entire payment. It is believed that very soon the bride price system would be abolished
or, at best, adjusted, so that women and men would contribute equally to it. This would be a great
step towards achieving equality and I believe that tireless female activists will soon take notice
and campaign against it. The abolition of the dowry system and all the other responsibilities that
society imposes on men would bring true gender equality, which would also free men, while
tying additional ropes to the already loaded female.

I believe that true equality would favor man more. It is like having a ten year old run the
same distance as a twenty five year old. The young child would feel the tension more than the
older child. It also follows that when society equates women and men, women would feel more
tension. The female is not as strong and free as the male, which the male can achieve at any
given time, the female would need to try harder to accomplish that same feat at the same time.
By yearning for gender equality, women harm themselves. Patriarchy, which feminists fight
against, has provided enough protection for women, if they destroy it however they want,
judging by their path, women would be more vulnerable to death and other ailments than they
are today. Patriarchy establishes, for example, that in a taxi, the man must be the one who sits
closest to the door, allowing the woman to sit inside; Its objective is to protect women in the
event of an accident. This arrangement is evident in all spheres of relations between men and
women. Men are supposed to take on the riskiest jobs and positions and women take the least
risky. So men die more than women. However, the females are trying to override this
arrangement, isn't it an opportunity for themselves? It is postulated that we now have more
women than men, but I know in the near future with the trend that feminists are following, that
the opposite would be the case. Women increasingly reject protection.

Feminism corrodes the family system

The value of informal education for a child is invaluable. This education is done better
than formal education. This will help instill family values in the child. The woman is more
prepared to play this role, since she is closer to the child in her childhood than the man. The rise
of feminism, which has seen women run to work almost immediately after delivery, is gradually
launching the rich benefit of informal education for the child; the family and society in general.
Children's destiny now rests on the shoulders of strangers (teachers), thanks to the work of
feminism. A woman abandons the primary duty that Nature grants her, in search of a man's
primary duty (equal economic opportunities). This would result in the child growing up with
wild ideas outside the family value system. The Bible's warning that we must train a child the
way he should go, so that when he grows up he does not stray from him, now he is falling on
deaf ears: father and mother are out there in the field, showing him. For equal economic, political
and social opportunities. I know that scientists will soon find an experiment that would measure
the effect; this would affect both the child and society in general.
CONCLUSION
The term, "Feminism" has various meanings. Some use it to refer to the political movement
initiated by women in history, others use it to shed light upon the injustices served against
womanhood. There are other meanings to this word too; it is used to highlight the 'qualities of
females', 'a revived theory for the womanhood' or rather like these days as we see, it is looked
upon as a 'controversy' more in the present era with extreme slogans being put forward by
women leading to extremism and rivalry amongst the two genders.

Feminism could be termed as both a political movement as well as an intellectual commitment. It

is a philosophical theory that observes justice for women. It came into being due to the quest for
social justice. The feminist inquiry gives detailed perspectives on political, economic, social and
phenomena.

During the 1970s, contemporary feminist philosophical scholarship emerged. During the end of
19th century, there was a greater number of women who began careers in higher education,
including philosophy. It was particularly between the 1960s and 1970s that women’s liberation
movement began. It included issues of women such as the institutions of marriage, sexuality, and
love, affirmative action, equal opportunities or abortion. It began by highlighting the roles and
locations of women. It related to the doings of women, their social and political locations, the
level of inclusion and exclusion of women in society, their activities were compared to those of
men, the worth or value of roles of women were measured, devaluation of their status was also
observed, their problems were looked upon that were ignored and finally the complexities of a
woman’s situatedness, including her sexuality, race, class, and ability with regard to her location
was studied to know its impact.

The feminist philosophy began to emerge from all the traditions of Western philosophy. It was
initiated and became prevalent mainly at the end of the twentieth century. It was during this time
that the struggles of feminist philosophers became fruitful.