Sexism and Racism Paper need done by 11pm Central Time. Read attached pictures and create a 2 page summary. The Topic of the paper is Sexism and Racism. Yo

Sexism and Racism Paper need done by 11pm Central Time. Read attached pictures and create a 2 page summary. The Topic of the paper is Sexism and Racism. You can use quotes from chapter but must be at least 2 pages. Apple Disney ESPN Yahoo! Apple Bing Google Yahoo
DOK (9) – moehe…
Certily for Paymen…
https://benefits.ide….
Financial Aid – MyL…
Eligibility Requirem…
Calories Needed fo… x VitalSource Books…
Mail – Hamad, Moh…
Topic: Paper Topics
Ask a new questio…
6 Sexism and Racism
In 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified by Congress, abolishing slavery in the United States. According to the text of the Amendment:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Despite the abolishment of slavery so many years ago, incidents of racial prejudice, some of them outrageous, continue to occur.
Since 1880 there have been roughly five thousand reported incidents in the United States of lynchings, most of them perpetrated against African Americans. On June 15, 2005, the U.S. Senate issued a for-
mal apology for its history of not having passed any one of approximately two hundred bills that would have made lynching a federal crime, the first of which was proposed over one hundred years ago.
Blockage in the Senate of antilynching laws was mainly due to opposition from senators from the U.S. South. In June 2018, three African-American members of Congress-Sens. Kamala Harris, Cory
Booker, and Tim Scott – introduced a bipartisan bill to make lynching a federal crime, the “Justice for Victims of Lynching Act of 2018.”] The bill defines the crime as “the willful act of murder by a collec-
tion of people assembled with the intention of committing an act of violence upon any person.” The bill also proposes that lynching be a classified as a hate crime that would justify enhanced sentences.
As we shall see in this chapter, moral questions about sexism and racism are not concerned with whether such discriminatory actions and practices are wrong-calling some action or practice racist or sex-
ist is often taken to entail that the action or practice in question is at least presumptively morally wrong. There are, however, important questions about the scope of racist and sexist actions and practices, and
there are moral questions about what (if anything) is owed to victims of gender-based and race-based discrimination. Here, then, are some of the main moral questions about sexism and racism:
• What best explains why sexism and racism are morally wrong?
• Given a history of racism and/or sexism in a country, is some sort of reparation or compensation owed to members of the victimized group?
• Given the importance of integration-particularly with respect to racial minorities – what steps should be taken to promote it?
In order to set the stage for understanding these questions and the moral controversies they involve, let us begin with some remarks about the concepts of sexism and racism.
1. SEXISM AND RACISM
We’ve updated our read aloud feature!
Give it a try here.
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines these terms in the following way:
Аа
235
口,
A~
14
42
2
332
2
JUL
.
o
de
m X
P
?
all
W
17
3D
…
MacBook Pro
DIO
F12
F11
F 10
000
000
F4
F9
so
F3
©
F1
F8
esc
F5
F7
F6
F2
File
Edit
View
History Bookmarks Window
Help
*
82%
Fri 1:24 PM
Q
bookshelf.vitalsource.com
Apple Disney ESPN Yahoo! Apple Bing Google Yahoo
Inbox (9) – moeha…
Certify for Paymen…
https://benefits.ide…
Financial Aid – MyL….
Eligibility Requirem…
Calories Needed fo…
VitalSource Books…
Mail – Hamad, Moh…
Topic: Paper Topics
Ask a new ques
1. SEXISM AND RACISM
The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines these terms in the following way:
!!!
Sexism
1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially: discrimination against women
2: behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex.
Racism
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial prejudice or discrimination.
Both definitions mention prejudice and discrimination as part of the common meaning of these terms, so let us work with these notions, keeping in mind the differences between sexism and racism re-
vealed in these definitions.2
First, let us distinguish between someone being a sexist or a racist and someone engaging in sexist or racist activities. To be a sexist is to have negative beliefs or attitudes about some individual because
she or he is of a particular sex. To be a racist is to have negative beliefs or attitudes about some individual because that individual belongs to some ethnic group. These definitions of being a sexist or racist
only require that one have a certain prejudice toward members of some group even if one never acts in a discriminatory way toward its members. If, for example, someone believes that someone else is infe-
rior in some way because the latter person is, say, black (about whom the person has negative beliefs or attitfides), then the person in question has racist attitudes and counts as a racist. Similarly for someone
being a sexist. To have sexist or racist beliefs or attitudes is to have a prejudice against the members of some group.
While being a sexist or a racist is a matter of being prejudiced, actions and practices directed against individuals belonging to a sex or ethnic group are discriminatory. For an action or activity to be sexist
or racist is for it to be directed against some individual because one believes (whether truly or not) that the individual belongs to a sex or an ethnic group. An act of sexism or racism may be intentional -as
when a person’s hatred for members of a certain sex or race motivates the person to knowingly engage in the sexist or racist activity. But there can be cases of unintentional sexist or racist acts as when some-
one does not intend to act in a racist way, but unwittingly says something or does something that is prejudicial toward a member of some ethnic group that results from the person’s prejudicial beliefs about
the group in question. For instance, someone might tell a joke and not intend for it to be harmful or prejudicial toward members of some ethnic group, even though in fact the joke is racist.
My characterizations of sexism and racism have focused on the beliefs, attitudes, and actions of individuals that constitute what we may call interpersonal sexism and racism. But institutions, legal sys-
tems, economic systems, and cultures can be sexist or racist if those institutions, systems, and cultures are partly constituted by rules, laws, regulations, and expectations that serve to promote sexist or racist
beliefs, attitudes, and actions. These are cases of institutional sexism and racism, and they are discussed in the selections by Ann E. Cudd and Leslie E. Jones and by J. L. A. Garcia.
As indicated, one of the main questions about sexism and racism is, “What best explains why these prejudices are wrong?” In my brief characterizations of these concepts I have spoken indifferently about
a racist or a sexist having negative beliefs or attitudes about some individual or group because of her or his race or sex. But one may ask whether sexism and racisi
We’ve updated our read aloud feature!
tain negative beliefs about members of some race or sex or whether racism is most fundamentally a matter of having certain negative attitudes. In “The Heart of
Give it a try here.
Garcia argues for what he calls a “volitional” explanation of the wrongness of racism, which he explains as follows:
236 口 A
6 Aa »
cer-
A.
332
JUL
2
42
2
09
91
17
S
m 4
?
P
…
Il
W
MacBook Pro
20
000
000
esc
oll
Satari File Edit View History Bookmarks
Window Help
82%
Fri 1:24 PM
a
bookshelf.vitalsource.com
G
Apple Disney ESPN Yahoo! Apple Bing Google Yahoo
Financial Aid – MyL… Eligibility Requirem… Calories Needed fo… VitalSource Books…
3
Inbox (9) – moeha…
Certify for Paymen…
https://benefits.ide…
Mail – Hamad, Moh…
Topic: Paper Topics
Ask a new questio.
My proposal is that we conceive of racism as fundamentally a vicious kind of racially based disregard for the welfare of certain people. In its central and most vicious form, it is a hatred, ill-will, directed
against a person or persons on account of their assigned race…. Racism, then, is something that essentially involves not our beliefs and their rationality or irrationality, but our wants, intentions, likes, and
dislikes and their distance from moral virtues. (p. 251)
E
Following Garcia, one might argue that sexism, too, is a matter of the heart rather than belief. However, Garcia’s proposal is challenged by Tommie Shelby in his “Is Racism in the ‘Heart’?” also included
among our chapter selections.
Q
C
2. INTEGRATION
If racial integration is a moral and political goal for communities (including countries), how might one conceive of the steps needed in order to succeed in this goal? This question is addressed by Elizabeth
Anderson in her contribution to this chapter. She identifies four stages of racial integration, the final and most difficult of which is informal social integration. This happens when members of different races
form friendships, date, marry, bear children, or adopt different race children. At school and at work, it happens when members of different races share conversations at the lunch table, hobnob over the coffee
break, and play together at recess.” One might wonder what barriers — political, social, and psychological — stand in the way of racial integration. As for the psychology of individuals, Daniel Kelly and Erika
Roedder in their contribution to this chapter discuss the phenomenon of implicit bias. In thinking about the prospects of full racial integration, it is worth considering how widespread and how difficult it
might be to overcome implicit racial bias. Similar worries can be raised about implicit sexual bias and the prospect of correcting interpersonal and institutional sexism.
These worries are exacerbated by the so-called alt-right movement. In his article “What Is the Alt-Right?; Cory Collins writes that the various factions “unite behind a nostalgia for a past in which diversi-
ty wasn’t openly embraced, and behind a disdain for what they perceive to be obstacles that keep them from traditional white masculine entitlements: racial and sexual dominance and economic power.
»3
3. THEORY MEETS PRACTICE
Let us conclude by considering how the following four moral theories address the moral questions we have raised about sexism and racism.
Consequentialism
A consequentialist will explain the wrongness of sexism and racism in terms of the purported (overall) negative consequences of such actions and practices. Slavery and ethnic cleansing are but two clear
cases of racist practices that have resulted in the maiming, murdering, and marginalization of members of various ethnic groups. It is very doubtful according to the consequentialist that the net value of the
consequences of such activities is anything but extremely negative.
As for reparation, the consequentialist will claim that such practices are morally required if they are more likely to have a greater net value for everyone affecte
We’ve updated our read aloud feature!
Give it a try here.
engaging in these activities. These are matters that may divide consequentialists, since there may be doubts about the overall net value of at least certain forms
1 not
*9
237
Aa »
332
JUL
42
2
S
S.
A
17
?
P
(((
W
…
MacBook Pro
Safari File Edit View History Bookmarks
Window Help
82%
Fri 1:24 PM
a
bookshelf.vitalsource.com
Apple Disney ESPN Yahoo! Apple Bing Google Yahoo
Inbox (9) – moeha… Certify for Paymen… https://benefits.ide… Financial Aid – MyL… Eligibility Requirem… Calories Needed fo… VitalSource Books…
Let us conclude by considering how the following four moral theories address the moral questions we have raised about sexism and racism.
Mail – Hamad, Moh…
Topic: Paper Topics
Ask a new questio…
)
e
Consequentialism
A consequentialist will explain the wrongness of sexism and racism in terms of the purported (overall) negative consequences of such actions and practices. Slavery and ethnic cleansing are but two clear
cases of racist practices that have resulted in the maiming, murdering, and marginalization of members of various ethnic groups. It is very doubtful according to the consequentialist that the net value of the
consequences of such activities is anything but extremely negative.
As for reparation, the consequentialist will claim that such practices are morally required if they are more likely to have a greater net value for everyone affected than the value that would result from not
engaging in these activities. These are matters that may divide consequentialists, since there may be doubts about the overall net value of at least certain forms of reparation and certain affirmative action
policies. Similar remarks apply to the issue of integration and the steps to be taken in striving to achieve it.
2
1
E
Kantian Moral Theory
For a Kantian, all persons regardless of ethnicity and sex are deserving of equal respect in the sense that it is not permissible to treat anyone in a discriminatory manner, since doing so fails to treat them as
ends in themselves. (This is an application of Kant’s Humanity formulation of the categorical imperative presented in chapter 1, section 2C.) Moreover, a Kantian can claim that sexist and racist beliefs and
attitudes are wrong (regardless of whether they result in the racist ever acting on his prejudicial beliefs or attitudes) because having them constitutes a failure to have a proper regard for the equal moral status
of persons regardless of their sex or ethnicity.
If one uses Kant’s Universal Law formulation of the categorical imperative, then whether a Kantian will claim that reparation or affirmative action policies are morally permissible (and perhaps morally
required) will depend on whether the reparation or policies in question can be universalized. Can one consistently conceive and will that such practices be adopted by all? If so, then they are morally permis-
sible. Can one consistently will that no such practices be adopted by all? If not, then not having such practices is morally wrong. Interestingly, some have arqued that Kant’s Humanity formulation can be
used to argue against affirmative action policies.” Kant’s Universal Law and Humanity formulations of the categorical imperative are supposed to agree in their moral implications. If the Universal Law for-
mulation conflicts in its verdict about affirmative action with the verdict reached by the Humanity formulation, this would reveal a deep incoherence in Kant’s own moral theory. Whether these principles re-
ally do yield opposing verdicts about the morality of affirmative action is controversial and cannot be settled here.
Ethics of Prima Facie Duties
On W. D. Ross’s moral theory (presented in chapter 1, section 2G), we have a prima facie duty of nonmaleficence-a prima facie duty not to harm others. This duty is not absolute-it can be overridden-
however, it is clear that gross instances of sexism and racism are cases of maleficence that are not overridden by any other prima facie duty on Ross’s list of seven such duties. Does Ross’s view address sex-
ist and racist prejudice even when having such beliefs and attitudes does not result in discriminatory actions? Ross’s theory of prima facie duties may not clearly deal with this kind of case, since all of his
prima facie duties have to do with actions and omissions. Robert Audi’s version of an ethic of prima facie duties includes a duty of respectfulness: “We should, in the manner of our relations with other peo-
5
ple, treat them respectfully.” But Audi’s formulation of the duty of respectfulness does not address the morality of a person’s attitudes; rather it concerns how wet
adi’s
We’ve updated our read aloud feature!
principle so that it does make reference to one’s beliefs and attitudes: we should, in the manner of our relations with other people and in our attitudes toward them.
Give it a try here.
y. In
having sexist or racist attitudes, one fails to have a proper respect for members of some sex or some ethnic group.
237
·
Aa »)
2
1
42
332
2
JUL
A
? |
P
all
W
95
17
MacBook Pro
Safari File
Edit
View History Bookmarks Window
Window Help
4
82%
Fri 1:24 PM
Q
bookshelf.vitalsource.com
Yahoo
Apple Disney ESPN Yahoo! Apple Bing Google
Inbox (9) – moeha… Certify for Paymen… https://benefits.ide… Financial Aid – MyL… Eligibility Requirem… Calories Needed fo… VitalSource Books… Mail – Hamad, Moh… Topic: Paper Topics Ask a new questio.
prima facie duties have to do with actions and omissions. Robert Audi’s version of an ethic of prima facie duties includes a duty of respectfulness: “We should, in the manner of our relations with other рес
ple, treat them respectfully.”” But Audi’s formulation of the duty of respectfulness does not address the morality of a person’s attitudes; rather it concerns how we treat others. But we can easily revise Audi’
principle so that it does make reference to one’s beliefs and attitudes: we should, in the manner of our relations with other people and in our attitudes toward them, treat them and regard them respectfully. In
having sexist or racist attitudes, one fails to have a proper respect for members of some sex or some ethnic group.
Both Ross and Audi recognize a prima facie duty of reparation: “We should make amends for our wrong-doing.”6 This principle, as stated, most directly applies to cases in which an individual has en-
gaged in wrongdoing-she ought to make amends to the person(s) she has wronged. But what about cases in which the main perpetrators are our ancestors and the individuals directly wronged are now
dead? Arguably, this is the case in contemporary North America in relation to the practice of slavery. Nevertheless, one can understand the “we” and “our” in the stated principle of reparation as the historical
“we” and “our.” If we are beneficiaries of past sexism or racism, then it may be morally incumbent on us to make reparations for past wrongs to those individuals of oppressed groups who (as a group) are
less well off than they would be had their group not been a historical target of sexism or racism.
In addition to a duty of reparations, the Ross/Audi view includes a duty of beneficence-a duty to promote the well-being of others. Applied to the issues of sexism and racism, this duty implies the more
specific duty of integration at both the interpersonal and institutional levels.
Q
C
Virtue ethics and Care Ethics
One might approach moral questions about racism by first asking what sort of character traits are best to have and which are best to avoid—the virtues and the vices, respectively, and then asking whether
racist activities (and being a racist) are expressions of some vice. If so, then such activities and attitudes are wrong. And here it seems that the virtue ethicist is going to be able to argue that this kind of moral
theory does provide a basis for the moral condemnation of racist actions and racist attitudes. The kinds of motives from which racism and racist acts arise-for example, hatred and fear-are characteristic of
the vices of hatred and arrogance, respectively. With regard to reparations and affirmative action policies, again, the virtue ethicist will want to evaluate the morality of particular policies by considering
whether such policies are those that a virtuous agent would advocate.
You may recall from the presentation of care ethics in chapter 1 (sec. 2H) that a key difference between virtue ethics and care ethics is the latter’s particular focus on value of relationships. A care ethics
perspective then (which is complementary to a virtue ethi…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment