Hypatia 21 (4):77-96 (2001)

Authors
Mari Mikkola
University of Amsterdam
Abstract
: Elizabeth Spelman has famously argued against gender realism. By and large, feminist philosophers have embraced Spelman's arguments and deemed gender realist positions counterproductive. To the contrary, Mikkola shows that Spelman's arguments do not in actual fact give good reason to reject gender realism in general. She then suggests a way to understand gender realism that does not have the adverse consequences feminist philosophers commonly think gender realist positions have.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2006
DOI 10.2979/HYP.2006.21.4.77
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,944
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Problems of Philosophy.Bertrand Russell - 1912 - Mind 21 (84):556-564.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Gender Muddle: Reply to Dembroff.Alex Byrne - 2021 - Journal of Controversial Ideas 1 (1).
Feminist Perspectives on Sex and Gender.Mari Mikkola - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Capricious Kinds.Jessica Laimann - 2020 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71 (3):1043-1068.
Social Construction.Ásta Sveinsdóttir - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (12):884-892.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
278 ( #37,849 of 2,498,146 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #212,239 of 2,498,146 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes