Suchergebnisse

The "#metoo movement" has led to an increased awareness of the kind of structural injustice that makes it hard to identify, and get rid of, sexual harassment and gender discrimination. Worker representatives, union coordinators and politicians have stated that they will pay more attention to how structural patterns of interpretation, symbols, stereotypes, and norms, are contributing to silencing the voices of the victims. My paper is not about #metoo movement or sexual harassment per se, but about the kinds of injustice embedded in ways of communicating and in how we assess each other's' statements and behavior. The first part of my paper discusses how epistemic injustice, implicit bias and micro injustice operates within our everyday social practices. The aim is to show how these forms of injustice are contributing to support collective frames of interpretation that need to change in order to realize gender equality. In the second part of the paper, I argue that the best solution to avoid the negative effects of implicit bias, micro inequality and epistemic injustice, is to make institutions responsible Social, political and legal institutions should be organized in a way that reduces negative effects of structural injustice. Inspired by Elisabeth Andersson's critique of Miranda Frickers concept of epistemic virtue, I discuss three reasons why this should be a case for institutions. First, all people tend to assess other people according to implicit biases. It is not a question of people's bad character, but a question of cultural narratives. Second, structural injustice is often rooted in small micro inequalities that are not in themselves unjust. The injustice occurs when these small actions aggregate into structural patterns of inequality. Third, institutional justice aims at creating just background conditions for individual actions.

The lecture is about how citizenship should be understood and conceptualized in liberal and plural societies. The main questions is: what is good citizenship and what kind of political identity should be protected. There will be a discussion of the difference between liberal and republican conceptions and a critical David Miller's claim that democratic welfare states need to be supported by national identity. Keywords: Citizenship, Liberalism, Republicanism, National identity.

Philosophical theories of justice tend to view justice either as questions of recognition or as questions of redistribution. In order to become "neutral" among the plurality of the good life in modern democratic societies, liberal theories have been limited to redistribution. According to Nancy Fraser, the most general meaning of justice is parity of participation. Equal opportunities to participation presupposes just redistribution as well as and recognition of culture, gender and sexual preferences. She proposes a conception of recognition, not linked to the idea of identity politics, but to a concept of status. Fraser has delivered a theory of justice that makes it possible to decide whether claims of recognition are legitimate or not. If claims for recognition are justified in a conception of justice that is agreeable from a common public perspective, a liberal theory does not need be restricted to distributive justice. ; Las teorías filosóficas tienden a ver la justicia como una cuestión de reconocimiento o de redistribución. Para ser "neutral" ante la pluralidad de nociones de la vida buena en las sociedades democráticas modernas, las teorías liberales se han ceñido a la dimensión distributiva. De acuerdo con Nancy Fraser, el significado fundamental de la justicia es la paridad en la participación. La igualdad de oportunidades para participar presupone la redistribución de los recursos así como el reconocimiento de las preferencias culturales, de género y sexuales. La autora propone una concepción del reconocimiento que no está vinculada a la política de la identidad, sino al concepto de estatus. Fraser ha ofrecido una teoría de la justicia que hace posible decidir cuándo las demandas de reconocimiento son legítimas y cuando no lo son. Si las demandas de reconocimiento están justificadas en base a una concepción de la justicia que está acordada desde una perspectiva pública común, entonces la teoría liberal de la justicia no necesita restringirse a la dimensión distributiva.

Source at https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v12i2.2267 . ; The paper discusses Rawls' and Habermas' theories of deliberative democracy, focusing on the question of religious reasons in political discourse. Whereas Rawls as well as Habermas defend a fully inclusivist position on the use of religious reasons in the 'background culture' (Rawls) or 'informal public sphere' (Habermas), we defend a moderately inclusivist position. Moderate inclusivism welcomes religiously inspired contributions to public debate, but it also makes normative demands on public argumentation beyond the 'public forum' (Rawls) or 'formal public sphere' (Habermas). In particular, moderate inclusivism implies what we call a 'conversational translation proviso' according to which citizens have a duty to supplement re-ligious with proper political arguments if – but only if – they are asked to do so by their co-discussants. This position, we argue, is more in line with the deeper intuitions behind Rawls' political liberalism and Habermas' deliberative model than is the fully inclusivist alternative.

Institutional focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion affects all parts of higher education management. Gender Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Academia: A Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Transformation scrutinises the conceptual framework for diversity, equity, and inclusion actions in academia to facilitate research-based and critically reflected decisions in higher education management.

The book contains 24 chapters, each focused on one of 24 fundamental concepts that are essential for identifying, understanding, and implementing organizational changes and counteracting unjustified disadvantages faced by women and members of other gender minorities in academia, preceded by an introductory binding chapter. The book also discusses concepts directed towards solutions, such as affirmative action and feminist pedagogies, and overcomes the traditional binary approach on gender by incorporating specific challenges faced by LGBTQ+ and transgender staff and students.

Gender Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Academia will be key reading for academics in Gender Studies and Education Studies, while also serving as a vital resource for individual consumers working in or preparing to enter leadership positions in higher education.