John Rawls Fairness And Equality Analysis

1759 Words8 Pages
Rawls on Fairness and Equality It is duly noted, as expressed by John Rawls that inequalities, which are more than explicitly shown in the Middle East, do not necessarily result in injustice. When Rawls speaks of a state of justice he claims his first principle is that everyone “has an equal right to the most extensive liberty” and that “inequalities are arbitrary”. It is duly noted however, if the suppression of one group results in the “every party gaining from the inequality”, including the unequal, it is acceptable. So I suppose this is the “morality” Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) tries to attain. FGM, according to Yusuf al-Qaradawi, is a way to “reduce temptation” for women to have sex. However, in a 2008 survey 60% of Egyptian men…show more content…
In order to attain this, we must refrain from what Heidegger calls a state of fallenness (inauthenticity). To live authentically one must live in a manner that is true to themselves, regardless of external pressures. When one abides by social pressures even if it is not something that they believe in, they are living inauthentically. In Middle Eastern society, there is no room for flexibility for women to be free, even though they are by nature a “free autonomous being”. A common objection allowing for the subjugation of women is their “nature”. However, as clarified by Hume “I can never catch myself at anytime without a perception… ’Tis the composition of these, therefore, which forms the self” ergo our actions form our person. Therefore, assumptions that women are “sluggish, eager, artful, stupid callous, lustful, ferocious, abased” cannot be true as “it is not nature that defines a woman; it is she who defines herself by dealing with nature on her own account in her emotional life”, thus the grounds that these regimes protect her as women cannot be generalised. Nevertheless, in this state of ‘protection’ women are “are often pronounced happy on the pretext that happiness consists of being at rest”. From an existential perspective it would appear that whilst men are subjects in the world, women are objects, whilst men act, women are acted upon. Simone de…show more content…
The fundamental problem with this argument is that feminism is most certainly not a Western ideal. Mona Elhathaway, an Egyptian feminist stated “when Westerners remain silent out of “respect” for foreign cultures, they show only respect for the most conservative elements”. What also seems evident is that we are not necessarily showing respect for the culture of the majority, but the culture of tyrannous government that oppress the people of the Middle East. The vague term “western countries” now often refers to more economically developed countries, regardless of geographical location. In this regard, according to the United Nations Gender Inequality Index, westernised civilisations have the smallest inequality gap. What’s more, in the more traditional “Western” sense (Europe and its previous colonies), of the top 15 countries in regard to GII, only Singapore (8th) and the Republic of Korea (15th) were not western countries. Thus, the misconception that feminism is a “western” philosophy is easy to make. However, you only need to look at Feminists like Egyptian author and physician Nawal El Saadawi and Huda Shaarawi, to see that feminism not only goes on in the Middle East, but just how long it has been going on for. In 1923, Shaarawi removed her veil when stepping off the train on her return into Cairo. The reception she received in the

More about John Rawls Fairness And Equality Analysis

Open Document