What Is Ethically Speaking Women's Equality

Women’s Equality, Ethically Speaking
Tami Fisher
SOC 120 Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility (ADG1422G)
Steven Smith
September 15, 2014

Women’s Equality, Ethically Speaking When you think of equality, the first thing that comes to mind is fact that all human beings should be treated equally, regardless of their, race, religion or gender. In today’s society, there are still issues regarding inequality between men and women. It seems that women are paid less for the same position as men in a corporate entity. Woman in many cases, are overlooked for a position when a man applies for the same job. Why is this? The truth is, there is no reason for it. Woman are equal and should be regarded as such. Women’s
equality has made great strides over the years, however, there are still many prejudices when it comes to woman’s equality and it is an issue that is highly unethical. Kathleen Sullivan wrote that, “On the one hand, sex is like race: it is visible and generally immutable characteristic that has been used to stereotype and classify, without regard to individual merit, in realms involving public benefits and private social ordering.
Woman, like African Americans, have been subject to formal legal disadvantages with respect to voting, jury service, occupational licenses, property ownership, and the like. Members of both groups have been subject to social prejudice and stigma when they exceeded the boundaries of the roles laid down for them” (Sullivan, 2002, p. 740). When you factor in ethical theories, the deontologist would quite possibly consider the dignity of women and take the stand that we are all equal and everyone deserves respect. Therefore, the deontologist, in this case would agree in equality between
sexes. Since the early 1900’s women have been fighting for fair and equal treatment. In fact, in 1920 an amendment was added to the constitution, granting women the ability to vote. This was just the beginning and “at the behest of Rep. Bella Abzug (D-NY), in 1971 the U.S. Congress designated August 26 as “Women’s Equality Day.” The date was selected to commemorate the 1920 passage of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, granting women the right to vote. This was the culmination of a massive, peaceful civil rights movement by women that had its formal beginnings in 1848 at the world’s first women’s rights convention, in Seneca Falls, New York.
The observance of Women’s Equality Day not only commemorates the passage of the 19th Amendment, but also calls attention to women’s continuing efforts toward full equality. Workplaces, libraries, organizations, and public facilities now participate with Women’s Equality Day programs, displays, video showings, or other activities” (Murphy-MacGregor, Ruthsdotter, Cuevas, Hammett , & Morgan, 1980). A utilitarian would most likely view the equality of woman as the right thing to do. Being that all women want equal rights and many men believe in equal rights for women as well. A utilitarian would realize that ethically, the greatest number would be affected and that the end result or consequence would be that of equality.
Murphy-MacGregor, Ruthsdotter, Cuevas, Hammett , & Morgan further report that “the women of the United States have been treated as second-class citizens and have not been entitled the full rights and privileges, public or private, legal or institutional, which are available to male citizens of the United States; and WHEREAS, the women of the United States have united to assure that these rights and privileges are available to all citizens equally regardless of sex; and WHEREAS, the women of the United States have designated August 26, the anniversary date of the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, as symbol of the continued fight for equal rights: and WHEREAS, the women of United States are to be commended and supported in their organizations and activities, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that August 26th of each year is designated as Women’s Equality Day, and the President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation annually in commemoration of that day in 1920, on which the women of America were first given the right to vote, and that day in 1970, on which a nationwide demonstration for women’s rights took place” (Murphy-MacGregor, Ruthsdotter, Cuevas, Hammett , & Morgan, 1980). Emotivism could view women’s rights and the fact that there is a day actually designated in the honor of women’s equality two ways. On one hand, they would believe that this is ethical because it would naturally receive a positive response from pretty much all women. On the other hand, emotivism could view this as wrong if you take into consideration that the male response may be a negative one.
According to my research, Theodore Roosevelt promoted women’s equality from the standpoint of an ethical egoist in my opinion. He supported it only because he felt that he would gain something from it. Leroy Dorsey reported that “Roosevelt’s near-obsession to promote manhood, to inspire modern men to act as he thought men should act, could explain why scholars fınd his discourse about women to be somewhat confounding. As a product of his time, he often echoed the dominant patriarchal view about women. According to Sarah Watts, men in the Victorian Era believed “women appeared less rational,” were “capable of dangerous moral lapses,” and that Roosevelt accepted women’s lack of moral capacity as fact. Bederman noted that Roosevelt’s talk about masculine prowess preserving white dominance euphemistically referred to “male sexual potency,” which framed national birth rates as an act of masculine prowess to avoid uncomfortable public discussions about women’s biological role in the matter. Despite his Harvard senior dissertation on “Equalizing Men and Women before the Law,” one biographer noted that Roosevelt “never became a champion of equal rights, although he half-heartedly supported the movement from time to time.” Patricia O’Toole questioned claims of Roosevelt’s true interest by alleging that he did not care much for women’s issues until it was politically expedient for him to try to gain their political support” (DORSEY, 2013, p. 423).
As I mentioned in my introduction, all human beings should be treated equally and with respect. In my opinion, women in many cases have to work harder to juggle, their home, kids, husband, shopping and in many cases work and school. Where in many cases the man goes to work. Mosser wrote, “Women are human beings. They are expected to care for themselves, their families, their husbands, their children, and their homes. As such, they have some of the most significant responsibilities that can be entrusted to anyone. Yet, while shouldering these responsibilities and others, a woman is deprived of the fundamental right of political representation. She works hard, often for no salary, and often harder than any man, and helps make the society in which she lives function; indeed, women make that society possible. Yet that same society prevents her from the right any man has, simply by accident of his being born a man: the right to vote. A woman 's contributions to society are absolutely indispensable. In addition to being a human being, with certain rights that cannot morally be violated—such as the right to vote—women deserve to have an equal say in how that society is organized and how its politics should be structured. As Susan B. Anthony stated, "There never will be complete equality until women themselves help to make laws and elect lawmakers."(Anthony, 1987, p. 901–908)” (Mosser, 2013, p. 2.3). The relativist would view the equality of women back then as unethical or wrong. Based on the personal beliefs of man, women were inferior and should not be thought of as equal. It was how the culture was many years ago.
It is exciting to see that woman in corporate America are beginning to climb the corporate ladder and close the hole on equality between the sexes. Still, there appears to be barriers that show the inequality of men and women. I found a very interesting article by Matsa & Miller in 2011, they reported that, “Although women make up 47 percent of the overall labor force, they account for only 6 percent of corporate CEOs and top executives. Why are there so few women at the top? Supply side explanations stemming from sex differences in preferences and productivity, in either corporate leadership or in home production, may play a role. For example, women may shy away from competition for promotions or choose to avoid the stress and work-life imbalance associated with occupying the executive office suite. Career interruptions due to childbearing may also limit women’s ultimate professional advancement” (Matsa & Miller, 2011, p. 635). So is it safe to say that women are not equal because they raise the family, that they do not belong in executive positions because they are moms? I suppose a relativist would view it as such from the standpoint of their own ethical standards. In theory women are equal or for better words should be treated as such.
We are in the day and age where women are not only allowed to vote, they can run for president of the United States. Still, there is the so called, glass ceiling in corporate leadership when it comes to women achieving executive status. Matsa & Miller also wrote, “At the same time, there may also remain systematic demand-based or institutional barriers that present a “glass ceiling” blocking women’s progress to the highest corporate levels, despite their continued gains at lower levels and in middle management. Current top executives and corporate directors, who are primarily male, may tacitly discriminate or stereotype by sex, and the historic absence of women in top positions may lead to hysteresis, preventing women from accessing powerful, male-dominated professional networks, or same-sex mentors. The existence of these demand-side barriers would suggest a potential role for women serving in positions of corporate leadership to help other women advance to top management” (Matsa & Miller, 2011, p. 635). So, as I see it, men are afraid to have women in executive positions because they could potentially assist other women to achieve the same status. Let’s think from a deontologist’s standpoint. Doesn’t it violate the dignity of women not to be placed in these positions? Therefore the ethical thing to do is, practice equality.
According to another source, Marlow, Marlow, & Arnold in 1995 reported, “The Civil Rights Act barred sexual discrimination in the workplace over thirty years ago, and more women are in the workforce than ever. However, there is little doubt that women have not moved up in the ranks of corporate America; there are very few women in top leadership positions. After several decades of federal and state legislation, enlightened management practices, and some heroic effort by female pioneers, we can say goodbye to the "good old boy network" in corporate America. Or can we? The supply of women qualified for management jobs continues to increase as more women accumulate work experience in organizations and complete management and professional education programs. Although the Civil Rights Act barred sexual discrimination in the workplace over thirty years ago. There is still considerable debate over the progress of women in corporate America, particularly at the managerial and administrative ranks. According to Labor Department, statistics compiled in 1990, women hold about 40 percent of all management positions. However, only a very few women managers have reached the top leadership positions in major American companies; top management positions are still dominated by men, and many organizations prefer to hire or promote men into these positions” (Marlow, Marlow, & Arnold, 1995, p. 39). Therefore, according to the information provided, “The perception is that the "glass ceiling" is real and exists, that women aren 't making any real progress in advancing to the top positions. This may partly be due to the trend of placing women in staff or support positions such as public relations and human resources” (Marlow, Marlow, & Arnold, 1995, p. 48). Granted, these statistics were reported in 1995, but compared to the article from 2011, there is not much of a difference. Sure, every year, strides have been made for women, but again not equal to that of man.
My brother works for the Federal Reserve Bank and he informed me that many, if not most of the senior executive staff are females.
Why does one of the most important financial institutions in the United States hire females for their senior management, when most businesses covet these positions to men? I cannot help but think that women in general, have a more organized nature. From being on time, to cleanliness, setting and keeping appointments, having the ability to multi-task, meeting deadlines and performing under pressure, are all traits of most women. This does not mean that men cannot have these traits as well, it just means that women are equal. Perhaps, women are generally more organized individuals because, history shows that women have been the primary managers in the household. I know from experience that managing a household is not an easy task. There are children’s schedules to keep track of, including school, doctors’ appointments and sports events. Women have to keep up with family functions, cleaning, laundry, cooking and shopping. In many cases they also work, go to school and assist in keeping up with their husband’s schedules as well. The experience a woman receives from juggling all of these tasks and maintain it in an organized way would surly translate into an asset in the corporate
world.
Throughout our history, there have been many issues that showed the inequality of women. According to B. Zorina Khan, it wasn’t until after 1868 that woman were granted a separate economy, had control over their earnings, or could have property in their own name (Khan, 1991). Khan also documented in 1869, that Arabella Mansfield was the first woman to enter the practice of law (Khan, 1991). However, it wasn’t until 1971 that barring women from practicing law was prohibited (Associated Press, 2013). Other issues happened later as well, such as the right to abortion in 1973. In theory, history is changing with regards to gender equality and women’s rights. However at what cost and why does it have to be a fight. I thought all humans were created equally? Not the case when it comes to discrimination of any kind. When you look at women’s equality from an ethical standpoint, there are many ways to view it. It could be viewed in favor of male or the female. However, when you look at the big picture it goes back to morality and what is right and what is wrong. The virtuous outlook would be that all humans are created equally.
In the United States, we have come a long way with gender equality. Women are being heard and processes are in place to increase equality. In other countries, women are still considered second class citizens. Take Iran for example, Hoodfar & Sadr in 2010 reported that, “
The experience of Iran indicates that religion, like other ideologies, is constantly manipulated, shaped and reshaped by its adherents. At least in theory, theological debate has the potential to accommodate gender equality, or at least gender equity, once women raise their voices and present women-centered readings of Islamic texts. However, the translation of these developments into actual laws to benefit women has been slow and stifled by the existing undemocratic state structure” (Hoodfar & Sadr, 2010, p. 901). At least we live in a democratic country.
In closing, we know that women have the right to vote and that there is equality for the most part within today’s society. Having said that, there is still men favored instances. One great example is in the work force. Many men are paid more for the same job that a women does. It’s sad really that we are not all created equal. Why is discrimination such a huge problem? The problem is, there is no answer to this question in my opinion. It doesn‘t make sense, but it is a fact of life. Just goes to show that our society still has a lot of growing to do. Gender equality is important and the utilitarian would agree that looking at society as an equal, is ethically the best choice, as it is best for the majority of the human population.

References
Associated Press. (2013). Nettie and Florence Cronise, Ohio 's first female lawyers, honored in Tiffin. Associated Press, 1.
DORSEY, L. G.-4. (2013). MANAGING WOMEN 'S EQUALITY: THEODORE ROOSEVELT, THE FRONTIER MYTH, AND THE MODERN WOMAN. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 16(3), 423-456.
Hoodfar, H., & Sadr, S. (2010). Islamic Politics and Women 's Quest for Gender Equality in Iran. Third World Quarterly, 31(6), 885-903. doi:10.1080/01436597.2010.502717
Khan, B. Z. (1991). The Democratization of Invention. Patents and Copyrights in American Economic Development 1790-1920.
Marlow, N. D., Marlow, E. K., & Arnold, V. (1995). Career Development and Women Managers: Does "One Size Fit All"? Human Resource Planning, 18(2), 38-49.
Matsa, D. A., & Miller, A. R. (2011). Chipping Away at the Glass Ceiling: Gender Spillovers in Corporate Leadership. American Economic Review, 101(3), 635-639. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy-library.ashford.edu/10.1257/aer.101.3.635
Mosser, K. (2013). Ethics and social responsibility (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
Murphy-MacGregor, M., Ruthsdotter, M., Cuevas, M., Hammett , P., & Morgan, B. (1980). Resource Center. Retrieved from nwhp.org: http://www.nwhp.org/resourcecenter/equalityday.php
Sullivan, K. M. (2002). Constitutionalizing Women 's Equality. California Law Review, 90(3), 735.