No. 54 (2025): Vulnerability: bodies, violence and care from the perspective of Social Sciences and Humanities
Articles

Beyond Equality and Discrimination

PDF (Spanish) ePUB (Spanish) TXT (Spanish)
  • Martha Albertson Fineman
Martha Albertson Fineman
Emory University School of Law. Atlanta. Estados Unidos

Published 2025-06-17

Keywords

  • vulnerability,
  • relationality,
  • social institutions,
  • resilience

Copyright (c) 2025 Martha Albertson Fineman

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Fineman, M. A. (2025). Beyond Equality and Discrimination. Revista Sarance, 54, 11-28. https://doi.org/10.51306/ioasarance.054.02

Share

Abstract

The societal frame of the “economically disadvantaged” is rooted in a distinction between a conceptual status of equality and the actuality of discrimination and disadvantage. This paradigm provides the governing logic for both criticism and justification of the status quo. This Article questions whether and to what extent this equality/antidiscrimination logic has lost its effectiveness as a critical tool and what, if anything, should be the foundation of the rationale that supplements or even replaces it.

PDF (Spanish) ePUB (Spanish) TXT (Spanish)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
  2. Alperovitz, G., & Daly, L. (2008). Unjust deserts: How the rich are taking our common inheritance. New Press.
  3. Dahl, R. A. (1982). Dilemmas of pluralist democracy: Autonomy vs. control. Yale University Press.
  4. Dinner, D. (2017). Beyond “best practices”: Employment-discrimination law in the neoliberal era. Indiana Law Journal, 92(4), 1059–1114.
  5. Fineman, J. W. (2018). A vulnerability approach to private ordering employment. In M. A. Fineman & J. W. Fineman (Eds.), Vulnerability and the legal organization of work(pp. 13–30). Routledge.
  6. Fineman, M. A. (1995a). Masking dependency: The political role of family rhetoric.Virginia Law Review, 81(7),2181–2216.
  7. Fineman, M. A. (1995b). The neutered mother, the sexual family and other twentieth century tragedies. Routledge.
  8. Fineman, M. A. (2000). Cracking the foundational myths: Independence, autonomy, and selfsufficiency. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 8(1),13–29.
  9. Fineman, M. A. (2001). Contract and care. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 76(3), 1403–1422.
  10. Fineman, M. A. (2008). The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 20(1), 1–23.
  11. Fineman, M. A. (2010). The vulnerable subject and the responsive state. Emory Law Journal, 60(2), 251–275.
  12. Fineman, M. A. (2011). The vulnerable subject: Anchoring equality in the human condition. In M. A. Fineman (Ed.), Transcending boundaries of law: Generations of feminism and legal theory (pp. 161–176). Routledge.
  13. Fineman, M. A. (2012). Beyond identities: The limits of an antidiscrimination approach to equality. Boston University Law Review, 92(5), 1713–1740.
  14. Fineman, M. A. (2013). Equality, autonomy, and the vulnerable subject in law and politics. In M. A. Fineman & A. Grear (Eds.), Vulnerability: Reflections on a new ethical foundation for law and politics (pp. 13–28). Ashgate.
  15. Fineman, M. A. (2014). Equality and difference– The restrained state.Alabama Law Review, 66(3), 609–626.
  16. Fineman, M. A. (2014). Vulnerability, resilience, and LGBT youth. Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review, 23(2), 307-331.
  17. Fineman, M. A., & Shepherd, G. B. (2016). Homeschooling: Choosing parental rights over children’s interests. University of Baltimore Law Review, 46(1), 57–106.
  18. Fineman, M. A. (2017). Vulnerability and inevitable inequality. Oslo Law Review, 4(3), 133–149.
  19. Fineman, M. A., & Dougherty, T. (Eds.). (2005). Feminism confronts Homo Economicus: Gender, law, & society. Cornell University Press.
  20. Fineman, M. A., & Shepherd, G. (2016). Homeschooling: Choosing parental rights over children’s interests.University of Baltimore Law Review, 46(1), 57–88.
  21. Halley, J. (2011a). What is family law? A genealogy. Part I.Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, 23(1), 1–6.
  22. Halley, J. (2011b). What is family law? A genealogy. Part II.Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities, 23(2), 189–195.
  23. Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2011). Winner-takeall politics: How Washington made the rich richer—and turned its back on the middle class. Simon & Schuster.
  24. Kirby, P. (2006). Vulnerability and violence: The impact of globalisation. Pluto Press.
  25. Lindblom, C. E. (1977). Politics and markets: The world’s political economic systems. Basic Books.
  26. Merton, R. K. (1967). On sociological theories of the middle range. In On theoretical sociology: Five essays, old and new (pp.39–72). Free Press.
  27. Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. University of California Press.
  28. Posner, R. A. (2014). Economic analysis of law (9th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
  29. Rodgers, D. T. (2011). Age of fracture. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  30. The Guardian. (2013, 8 de abril). Margaret Thatcher: A life in quotes. https: //www. theguardian.com/politics/2013/apr/08/margaret-thatcher-quotes