Difference feminism - Revision history

Lquilter: cats

2010-11-11T17:31:30Z

cats

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:31, 11 November 2010
Line 38:		Line 38:
	* [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]], ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.		* [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]], ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.

	[[Category:Feminism]]		[[category:Feminism]]
			[[Category:Feminism and critical theory]]

75.69.231.7 at 15:23, 19 May 2007

2007-05-19T15:23:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:23, 19 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Difference feminism''' is a strand of feminist thought that holds that there are inherent and significant differences between the genders, but that the masculine version is not better. The key component of difference feminism is its critique of patriarchal devaluation of the feminine. Difference feminists vary on whether the feminine version is better than the masculine, or on whether they are simply different but "equal" and complementary (equality is not sameness). Difference feminists are generally thought of as [[essentialism\|essentialists]], although some strands of difference feminism see it not as a philosophical approach to gender difference but as a pragmatic response to actual differences, whatever they are.		'''Difference feminism''' is a [[feminisms\|strand of feminist thought]] that holds that there are inherent and significant differences between the genders, but that the masculine version is not better. The key component of difference feminism is its critique of patriarchal devaluation of the feminine. Difference feminists vary on whether the feminine version is better than the masculine, or on whether they are simply different but "equal" and complementary (equality is not sameness). Difference feminists are generally thought of as [[essentialism\|essentialists]], although some strands of difference feminism see it not as a philosophical approach to gender difference but as a pragmatic response to actual differences, whatever they are.

	==Essentialism and dualism==		==Essentialism and dualism==

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism in SF */ characterizing works

2007-03-14T19:27:20Z

Difference feminism in SF: characterizing works

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:27, 14 March 2007
Line 26:		Line 26:
	Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence. Because literature (even [[didactic literature]]) does not engage directly with material but through the creation of societies, situations, characters, [[thought experiments]], and so on, it is not always easy to assess whether a ''work'' is "essentialist" or if the author is "advocating" difference feminism, or whether the work is simply exploring and critiquing the ideas. Below we list some works that have engaged the questions and the way scholars and readers have understood those works.		Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence. Because literature (even [[didactic literature]]) does not engage directly with material but through the creation of societies, situations, characters, [[thought experiments]], and so on, it is not always easy to assess whether a ''work'' is "essentialist" or if the author is "advocating" difference feminism, or whether the work is simply exploring and critiquing the ideas. Below we list some works that have engaged the questions and the way scholars and readers have understood those works.

			'''Works apparently positing difference feminism (esp. female superiority)''':
	* [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.		* [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.
	* [[Sally Miller Gearhart]], ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.		* [[Sally Miller Gearhart]], ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.

			'''Works engaging in [[thought experiments]] about difference feminism, and arguably representing an [[essentialist]] stance:'''
	* [[Sheri S. Tepper]], ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]'' - Men are genetically prone to violence and destructive hierarchical behaviors.		* [[Sheri S. Tepper]], ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]'' - Men are genetically prone to violence and destructive hierarchical behaviors.
	* [[Octavia Butler]]; see especially the [[Patternist series]] and the [[Xenogenesis trilogy]]. While neither are explicitly essentialist, they both repeatedly engage with biology and gender differences in behavior.		* [[Octavia Butler]]; see especially the [[Patternist series]] and the [[Xenogenesis trilogy]]. While neither are explicitly essentialist, they both repeatedly engage with biology and gender differences in behavior.

			'''Works engaging in [[thought experiments]] about difference feminism, and critiquing an [[essentialist]] stance:'''
	* [[Nicola Griffith]], ''[[Ammonite]]'' - An anti-essentialist work: Violence and hierarchy are ''human'' traits, which are evident even in a woman-only world. A woman-only world is a ''human'' world, not something different in kind.		* [[Nicola Griffith]], ''[[Ammonite]]'' - An anti-essentialist work: Violence and hierarchy are ''human'' traits, which are evident even in a woman-only world. A woman-only world is a ''human'' world, not something different in kind.
	* [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]], ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.		* [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]], ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.

	[[Category:Feminism]]		[[Category:Feminism]]

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism in SF */ lit crit is hard

2007-03-14T17:29:43Z

Difference feminism in SF: lit crit is hard

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:29, 14 March 2007
Line 24:		Line 24:

	==Difference feminism in SF==		==Difference feminism in SF==
	Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence.		Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence. Because literature (even [[didactic literature]]) does not engage directly with material but through the creation of societies, situations, characters, [[thought experiments]], and so on, it is not always easy to assess whether a ''work'' is "essentialist" or if the author is "advocating" difference feminism, or whether the work is simply exploring and critiquing the ideas. Below we list some works that have engaged the questions and the way scholars and readers have understood those works.

	* [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.		* [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.
	* [[Sally Miller Gearhart]], ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.		* [[Sally Miller Gearhart]], ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism in SF */ links

2007-03-14T17:26:24Z

Difference feminism in SF: links

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:26, 14 March 2007
Line 25:		Line 25:
	==Difference feminism in SF==		==Difference feminism in SF==
	Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence.		Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence.
	* Charlotte Perkins Gilman, ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.		* [[Charlotte Perkins Gilman]], ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.
	* Sally Miller Gearhart, ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.		* [[Sally Miller Gearhart]], ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.
	* Sheri S. Tepper, ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]'' - Men are genetically prone to violence and destructive hierarchical behaviors.		* [[Sheri S. Tepper]], ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]'' - Men are genetically prone to violence and destructive hierarchical behaviors.
	* Octavia Butler; see especially the Patternist ~~books~~ and the Xenogenesis trilogy. While neither are explicitly essentialist, they both repeatedly engage with biology and gender differences in behavior.		* [[Octavia Butler]]; see especially the [[Patternist series]] and the [[Xenogenesis trilogy]]. While neither are explicitly essentialist, they both repeatedly engage with biology and gender differences in behavior.
	* Nicola Griffith, ''[[Ammonite]]'' - An anti-essentialist work: Violence and hierarchy are ''human'' traits, which are evident even in a woman-only world. A woman-only world is a ''human'' world, not something different in kind.		* [[Nicola Griffith]], ''[[Ammonite]]'' - An anti-essentialist work: Violence and hierarchy are ''human'' traits, which are evident even in a woman-only world. A woman-only world is a ''human'' world, not something different in kind.
	* Zoe Ann Fairbairns, ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.		* [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]], ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.

	[[Category:Feminism]]		[[Category:Feminism]]

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism in SF */ more SF

2007-03-14T17:24:23Z

Difference feminism in SF: more SF

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:24, 14 March 2007
Line 25:		Line 25:
	==Difference feminism in SF==		==Difference feminism in SF==
	Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence.		Difference feminism has played a significant role in feminist SF, particularly in the various early feminist utopias, but also within the various strand of goddess-themed fantasy. Difference feminist arguments in contemporary SF can be seen most strongly in [[Sheri Tepper]]'s work of the 1980s and 1990s, particularly [[The Gate to Women's Country]], which posited a world in which violence and other undesirable behaviors were genetically masculine, and that [[eugenics]] could solve the problems of patriarchy and violence.
	* Charlotte Perkins Gilman, ''[[Herland]]''		* Charlotte Perkins Gilman, ''[[Herland]]'' - A society run by women would be socialist and peaceful.
	* Sally Miller Gearhart, ''[[Wanderground]]''		* Sally Miller Gearhart, ''[[Wanderground]]'' - Women are innately peaceful & attuned to nature; society run by men is exploitative and "unnatural" at a deep level. Gay men are more like women in some respects.
	* Sheri S. Tepper, ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]''		* Sheri S. Tepper, ''[[The Gate to Women's Country]]'' - Men are genetically prone to violence and destructive hierarchical behaviors.
			* Octavia Butler; see especially the Patternist books and the Xenogenesis trilogy. While neither are explicitly essentialist, they both repeatedly engage with biology and gender differences in behavior.
			* Nicola Griffith, ''[[Ammonite]]'' - An anti-essentialist work: Violence and hierarchy are ''human'' traits, which are evident even in a woman-only world. A woman-only world is a ''human'' world, not something different in kind.
			* Zoe Ann Fairbairns, ''[[Benefits]]'' - England passes a law to provide benefits for stay-at-home moms with purportedly feminist intentions; the result is less than feminist.

	[[Category:Feminism]]		[[Category:Feminism]]

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism as pragmatism */ see benefits

2007-03-14T17:16:40Z

Difference feminism as pragmatism: see benefits

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:16, 14 March 2007
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.		Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.

	As a legal matter, critics argue that legal rules could be set up in a gender-neutral matter that targeted the ''source'' of discrimination rather than its gendered manifestation. For instance, divorce settlements could be gender-neutral but take into account the ~~fact that a partner~~ sacrifices her or his career for the family. Critics also note that the "level playing field" argument is not an argument for essentialism or difference feminism, but simply a failure to look at patriarchy holistically. Legal theorists arguing from a difference feminist approach respond that even looking at patriarchy holistically, "equality" is attained at different rates in various fields, and until full social, economic, and legal equality is gained, legal structures can be used in the meantime to protect women from the lingering effects of patriarchy.		As a legal matter, critics argue that legal rules could be set up in a gender-neutral matter that targeted the ''source'' of discrimination rather than its gendered manifestation. For instance, divorce settlements could be gender-neutral but take into account if one of the marital partners sacrifices her or his career for the family. This gender-neutral response not only addresses the "need" for difference feminism, it also avoids the problem of law being overly prescriptive in defining family structure and reinforcing patriarchal norms (such as heterosexuality, stay-at-home moms, etc.) (See [[Zoe Ann Fairbairns]]' ''[[Benefits]]'' for a cogent SF criticism of legal difference feminism.)

			Critics also note that the "level playing field" argument is not an argument for essentialism or difference feminism, but simply a failure to look at patriarchy holistically. Legal theorists arguing from a difference feminist approach respond that even looking at patriarchy holistically, "equality" is attained at different rates in various fields, and until full social, economic, and legal equality is gained, legal structures can be used in the meantime to protect women from the lingering effects of patriarchy.

	==Difference feminism in SF==		==Difference feminism in SF==

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism as pragmatism */ eg

2007-03-14T17:13:48Z

Difference feminism as pragmatism: eg

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:13, 14 March 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?		Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?

	This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, the argument goes, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives to discern whether women are more likely to protect economic rights, vote for healthcare legislation, etc. Statistical differences in polled positions and voting records have also been capitalized on by politicos. In the US, the gender gap in voting records (women skew more towards Democrats and human rights, men skew more towards Republicans and restrictive legal regimes) has been capitalized on by politicos who sought to turn women's purported concern for family values into pro-Republican "security mom" voters.		This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, the argument goes, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives to discern whether women are more likely to protect economic rights, vote for healthcare legislation, etc. Statistical differences in polled positions and voting records have also been capitalized on by politicos. In the US, for instance, the gender gap in voting records (women skew more towards Democrats and human rights, men skew more towards Republicans and restrictive legal regimes) has been capitalized on by politicos who sought to turn women's purported concern for family values into pro-Republican "security mom" voters.

	Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.		Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism as pragmatism */ political uses of diff fem

2007-03-14T17:13:30Z

Difference feminism as pragmatism: political uses of diff fem

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:13, 14 March 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?		Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?

	This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, the argument goes, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives.		This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, the argument goes, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives to discern whether women are more likely to protect economic rights, vote for healthcare legislation, etc. Statistical differences in polled positions and voting records have also been capitalized on by politicos. In the US, the gender gap in voting records (women skew more towards Democrats and human rights, men skew more towards Republicans and restrictive legal regimes) has been capitalized on by politicos who sought to turn women's purported concern for family values into pro-Republican "security mom" voters.

	Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.		Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.

Lquilter: /* Difference feminism as pragmatism */ clarity

2007-03-14T17:09:24Z

Difference feminism as pragmatism: clarity

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:09, 14 March 2007
Line 15:		Line 15:
	Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?		Some difference feminists have moved away from essentialist arguments, treating difference feminism as merely an intermediate strategy that pragmatically recognizes the differences between the genders in social, economic, political, and legal circumstances. Here, difference feminism operates as a strong rebuke to [[equality feminism]], which simply says that if you level the playing the field (legally), women and men will compete fairly and find their own individual levels. Leveling the playing field in one area (such as granting women's suffrage) does not, in fact, eliminate all gender differences, and those that create social injustice must still be addressed. If you do not recognize the differences, how can you effectively target them?

	This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives.		This strand of argument has been particularly important in feminist legal theory. Historically, difference feminism was used within the Victorian-era women's suffrage movement in the west, to argue that women, with their greater moral purity, would help to reform politics. We should recognize the differences and use those differences to improve society, the argument goes, but we need to improve women's legal standing to do so. While the argument from Victorian feminist morality looks quaint to modern eyes, it lives on in efforts to increase political representation of women, and in analyses of, for instance, voting habits of male and female political representatives.

	Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.		Contemporary feminist legal theorists have noted that difference feminism has another, very practical role to play in legal theory. Whatever the source of the differences, men and women occupy different statuses in our society, and have different features which can act as legal disabilities. For instance, because many (middle- and upper-class) women traditionally sacrifice or interrupt their careers to support their families, even becoming stay-at-home moms, the law should take account of that difference in its disposition of marital assets on divorce, or in its inheritance rules. This historical discrimination justifies various forms of affirmative action. Or, for example, since women can and do become pregnant, there need to be protective legal rules to ensure that women are not legally, economically, and socially harmed by this difference with men.