International Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (1):55-63 (2007)
In a recent paper Carol Hay has argued for the conclusion that “a woman who has been sexually harassed has a moral obligation to confront her harasser.” I will argue in this paper that Hay’s arguments for her conclusion are unsound, for they rest on both a misconstrual of the nature of personal autonomy, and a misunderstanding of its relationship to moral responsibility. However, even though Hay’s own arguments do not support her conclusion that women have a duty to resist sexual harassment this conclusion can draw support from arguments that are independent of hers. Women, then, do indeed have a moral obligation to confront those who sexually harass them
|Keywords||Applied Philosophy General Interest|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Loose Women, Lecherous Men: A Feminist Philosophy of Sex.Linda Lemoncheck - 1998 - Philosophical Studies 89 (2-3):369-373.
Moral Obligation: Form and Substance.Stephen Darwall - 2010 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (1):31-46.
Responsibility and Obligation: Some Kantian Directions.Suzanne M. Uniacke - 2005 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (4):461 – 475.
Reproductive Autonomy and Reproductive Technology.Sylvia Burrow - 2012 - Techne 16 (1):31-45.
Women's Autonomy and Feminist Aspirations.Marilyn Friedman - 1996 - Journal of Philosophical Research 21:331-340.
Whether to Ignore Them and Spin: Moral Obligations to Resist Sexual Harassment.Carol Hay - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (4):94-108.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #181,969 of 2,164,552 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,058 of 2,164,552 )
How can I increase my downloads?