'Feminism Philosophy Essay\r'

'At the onset, Valerie Solana’s trumpery pronunciamento is a acidify that was clearly addressed to phallic species which she regarded as unintended a â€Å"biological accident. ” The first off deuce paragraphs of her work reveal her deep acerbicness on the usance of hands and women in the society. The last part of the first paragraph resounds her strong rejection of the phallic sex. Solanas identifies masculine in various government agencys scarce totally describing the phallic as an undesirable species. To her, to be antheral is something that a composition should be ashamed of and virileness is a dearth, a disease and that males ar emotionally limited.\r\nShe tell male is completely an â€Å"isolated unit of measurement” and e trulything that he has in himself is nonhing tho a tool that he mathematical function to fulfill his drives and needs. Her work also reflect a seemingly an al almost bitter feeling towards men. She used strong a nd precise offending sentences emphasizing on the males’ divinatoryly some(prenominal) in capabilities including relationship tho of his physical sensation. However, the male according to her is exposed Solano’s obvious hatred to the male sex was also expressed in the way she describes how a male expresses himself.\r\nShe set forth the male’s behavior as physically passive but so he does non like it. He expressed his frustration of his own passiveness by screwing a peachying woman he despises. She said the male go for his passivity by projecting it onto women and by screwing. Overall, Valerie Solano’s work was an expression of her sentiments on the role between the male and the feminine in which she downgraded the role of the male species as concerns only of him self, but she gratifies women for her unselfish role. Solano verbalize that musical composition m early(a) cares for what is best for her children, the draw only wants what is best for him.\r\nShe was a man hater. In contrast with the work of Solano, kidskin’s work is to a greater extent target area lens although she also urges that women should detach themselves from the world of males and male dominated institution. This separation according to nestling is of various sorts which must includes institutions, relationships, roles and activities that are male dominated. baby’s work reflects a more meaningful feminist credit as she discussed important feminist issues lead story to their objective of achieving liberation from the male potentiality world.\r\ndarn Solano strongly reject the male describing him as incapable, emotionally dim, a disease, and so forth all maligning the male sex, claw was more objective in a sense that she also put her feet on the other’s shoes. Though a real feminist and also a staunch advocate of the separation from male dominance, she described women’s role in the context of the traditional nonio n that men are the provider and the protector of women. tike cited the notion of parasitism of the male and female in terms of family matters.\r\nBut she insists that the parasitism â€Å"goes the other way around. ” It is the male that is parasites to females’ because men are nonsensical and used up by maintenance by their own. In general, although both women were against the actual arrangement of the roles of men and women in the society, Solano was very radical in her views about the males’ role and the male as a mortal to the point that she appeared being a man-hater. electric razor on the other hand, was more objective although she also deplored the male as weak and parasites to women.\r\nBut unlike Solano’s views of the male which is very personal and very negative, Fry’s opinion reflects a conservatively weigh ideas regarding the issues involving the role of men and women which in the perspective of feminist like them are offensive an d binding to women. Is having a house amahen over virtuously wrong? What are BARBARA Ehrenreich’s reasons for thinking so? Is correct? why or why not? In my own opinion, having a maid is not virtuously wrong as foresighted as they are not set fairly, are not insultd, and given secure compensation.\r\nIn the contexts of the employers, maids should not be viewed as slaves rather they should be considered as prole or even employees. Ong (2006) was right in her assessment that having a domestic avail or 2 is part of the â€Å" pact with two-income families” (p. 201). Ong noted that a high ensample of living is considered impossible â€Å"without one or even two foreign maids to express care of the household chores as good as of children or the elderly” (p. 201). Thus, having a maid at topographic point should be considered as a social right, bonnie like access to better schools, housing, shop malls, and leisure.\r\nHowever, in the context of the famili es of these maids, to be maid in a foreign body politic is a source of hope on their economic miseries. Most of the families these maids came from are sorry and the best option for them to survive is for their lady friend to get employment overseas. In other words, hiring maids meant helping those families. Unfortunately, there are endlessly people who discriminate others. They tend to abuse their domestic servants by giving them inadequate and unfair treatment.\r\nAccording to the Human Rights Watch, many domestic helpers complain of abusive treatments such(prenominal) as not providing them enough food, continuing working hours, and racist behavior. These are what is morally wrong and not the hiring of domestic helpers. Barbara Ehrenreich’s thinking about having maids at home On the other hand, Barbara Ehrenreich noted the case of women around the world and draws a comparison that for every women executive who travels, large enumerate of women from the third world co untries leave their families to work as domestic servants in the first world countries.\r\nFor Ehrenreich, this mass exodus of women is morally wrong because it results in odd displacements. Ehrenreich cited the facts that while these women carry with them the warmth of the female button into the wealthy country that hired them; this is unremarkably at the expense of their families left behind. Their vanish deprive their families of her care which she willingly bear to the families that need her services abroad. For Ehrenreich, having domestic helpers abuse one’s moral denotation and she calls on her readers not hire maids to clean the house.\r\nEhrenreich argued having domestic servants clean the house is not good for the family especially the children. While Ehrenreich was more concern on are supposed to clean the house, which is usually done by the maids, she deplored that cleaning other people’s house is so gross and demeaning. While Ehrenreich may have a poi nt, but this issue should not be seen as morally wrong rather it should viewed in the economic context. Having a maid is not morally wrong because it is a the right way job for women who have fewer opportunities in life, especially those coming from very shortsighted families in third world countries.\r\nAs long as they are do by fairly and justly compensated, it is never morally wrong to employ somebody to do some jobs that one cannot do anymore. It is the most practical thing because it serves in two ways, it benefits the employer because they can concentrate in their work, and it benefits the maid because she will earn dollars for her family back home. character reference Fry, M. (1983) Some Reflection on separatism and Power http://www. feminist-reprise. org/docs/fryesep. htm Ong, A. (2006) Neoliberalism as Exception the States: Duke University Press Solano, V. & Avital, R. (2004) SCUM Manifesto USA: Verso\r\n'