Two modes of argumentation have been used on behalf of women’s emancipation in Western societies. Arguments in what could be called the “relational” feminist tradition maintain the doctrine of “equality in (5) difference,” or equity as distinct for equality. They posit that biological distinctions between the sexes result in a necessary sexual division of labor in the family and throughout society and that women’s pro- creative labor is currently undervalued by society, to (10) the disadvantage of women. By contrast, the individual- ist feminist tradition emphasizes individual human rights and celebrates women’s quest for personal autonomy, while downplaying the importance of gender roles and minimizing discussion of childbearing and its attendant (15) responsibilities. Before the late nineteenth century, these views coexisted within the feminist movement, often within the writings of the same individual. Between 1890 nd 1920, however, relational feminism, which had been the (20) dominant strain in feminist thought, and which still pre- dominates among European and non-Western feminists, lost ground in England and the United States. Because the concept of individual rights was already well estab- lished in the Anglo-Saxon legal and political tradition, (25) individualist feminism came to predominate in English- speaking countries. At the same time, the goals of the two approaches began to seem increasingly irreconcil- able. Individualist feminists began to advocate a totally gender-blind system with equal rights for all. Relational (30) feminists, while agreeing that equal educational and economic opportunities outside the home should be avail- able for all women, continued to emphasize women’s special contributions to society as homemakers and mothers; they demanded special treatment (35) including protective legislation for women workers, state-sponsored maternity benefits, and paid compensa- tion for housework. Relational arguments have a major pitfall: because they underline women’s physiological and psychological (40) distinctiveness, they are often appropriated by political adversaries and used to endorse male privilege. But the individualist approach, by attacking gender roles, deny- ing the significance of physiological difference, and condemning existing familial institutions as hopelessly (45) patriarchal, has often simply treated as irrelevant the family roles important to many women. If the individu- alist framework, with its claim for women’s autonomy, could be harmonized with the family-oriented concerns of relational feminists, a more fruitful model for con- (50) temporary feminist politics could emerge.
125. The author of the passage alludes to the well- established nature of the concept of individual rights in the Anglo-Saxon legal and political tradition in order to (A) illustrate the influence of individualist feminist thought on more general intellectual trends in English history (B) argue that feminism was already a part of the larger Anglo-Saxon intellectual tradition, even though this has often gone unnoticed by critics of women’s emancipation. (C) explain the decline in individualist thinking among feminists in non-English-speaking countries (D) help account for an increasing shift toward individualist feminism among feminists in English- speaking countries. (E) account for the philosophical differences between individualist and relational feminists in English- speaking countries 请问NN对这题的A是怎么理解的？
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2004-7-22 05:44:00
楼主
I agree with fuyun