Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Criticisms of the UC model (does it place constrictions on those who do…

- - - - Elder care, housework
        
        these are also all essential parts of the work that goes into supporting a society
      - Women actually don't spend that much time directly on childcare (about 35 minutes each day)
    - - We think society ought to continue, and at least some people need to have children to allow it to continue
        
        on the objection's terms, you ought only to have children if you can provide for them in the terms of the society that you live in
        
        monetary wealth is largely the metric for success in our society
        
        therefore you ought only to have children if you can provide for them monetarily
        
        you can work a job that is necessary and contributes to society (and are encouraged to do so, with no real viable alternatives), but this does not necessarily leave room for having a child
        
        therefore this is an unrealistic metric, and ought to be rejected
        
        2 more items...
        
        Rawls' conception of society as 'intergenerational' (Long)
  - - - also aim to increase the principles of equity she mentions
- - - - this may be the case, but undervaluing of labour is still a form of shirking, and employers have been profiting off of this
- - - - her scenario is (admittedly) utopic. If a market run society exists and there are people who want to get ahead, then it will end up with cases of this division of labour style being favoured because it is so much more efficient
        
        there are people who live like this now, and this is not incompatible with putting in clauses so as to allow people to make their own choices about whether or not to engage
        
        I don't think that her vision is impossible, but I do doubt the interest some people have in giving up aspects of their time - I think it might bias the labour market towards these people, and then we get into the question of does the state have to supply jobs to those with children at all?
        
        I do think that this wouldn't be the case forever, or is the case for the majority of people (American Sociological paper that prefers inequality)
        
        Rubery agrees with this
        
        Rubery thinks that the state needs to enforce changes to employers behaviour so as to address gender heirarchies within businesses, than do not arise specifically from gender roles but from employer practices (Rubery, 519)
        
        we have examples of things that we seem to hold dear over making profits - ethical sourcing, good representation, there is a precedent for this activity already
        
        emphasise this one
        
        we are assuming that those without caregiving responsibilities are more productive, not sure if this is actually true
        
        this system ought not to be enforced, but highly encouraged and accompanying (financial) benefits so as to make the cost neutral to businesses