Philosophy and Theology 1 (4):361-368 (1987)
AbstractFeminists and gay liberationists condemn romantic love as an inherently sexist and heterosexist institution which requires sexist idealizations and heterosexual desire. I argue that although romantic love in contemporary Western societies often includes sexist idealizations and heterosexual desire, those elements are not necessary constituents of the concept of romantic love. The crucial elements in romantic love are concern, admiration, the desire for reciprocation, and the passion for union, none of which require either sexist idealizations or heterosexual sexual desire.
Similar books and articles
Romantic Love: Neither Sexist Nor Heterosexist.Carol Caraway - 1987 - Philosophy and Theology 1 (4):361-368.
In the Name of Love: Romantic Ideology and its Victims.Aharon Ben-Zeʼev & Ruhama Goussinsky - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Just Friends, Friends and Lovers, or…?Caroline J. Simon - 1993 - Philosophy and Theology 8 (2):113-128.
Bestowal Without Appraisal: Problems in Frankfurt’s Characterization of Love and Personal Identity.Gary Foster - 2009 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (2):153-168.
Romantic Love: A Philosophical Inquiry.Dwight Van de Vate - 1981 - Pennsylvania State University Press.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads