Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:58:55.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Through A Glass Darkly: Paradigms Of Equality And The Search For A Woman's Jurisprudence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2020

Linda J. Krieger
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, Ms. Krieger explores the controversy concerning pregnancy disability leave presented by the case of California Federal Savings v. Guerra in light of Thomas Kuhn's model of scientific paradigm change and Carol Gilligan's theory regarding sex differences in moral reasoning. She argues that the controversy reflects a period of paradigm crisis in equality jurisprudence, brought about in part by the recent inclusion of greater numbers of women into the jurisprudential community.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 2 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Philosophy and Women Symposium , Winter 1987 , pp. 45 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bureau of Labor Statistics U.S. Department of Labor. 1980 Perspectives on working women: A databook. Bulletin No. 2080.Google Scholar
Einstein, Albert. 1949. Autobiographical note. In Albert Einstein: Philosopher‐scientist, ed. Schillp, P.A.Evanston, Ill.: Library of Living Philosophers.Google Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, Hernia Hill. 1983. Sex‐based discrimination, 2nd edition. St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Kay, Hernia Hill. 1985. Equality and difference: The case of pregnancy. Berkeley Women's Law Journal 1(1): 1–38.Google Scholar
Krieger, Linda J. and Cooney, Patricia N. 1983. The Miller‐Wohl controversy: Equal treatment, positive action and the meaning of women's equality. Golden Gate University Law Review: 13 (3): 513–577.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lever, Janet. 1976. Sex differences in the games children play. Social Problems 23: 478–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1970. The subjection of women. In Essays on sex equality, ed. Rossi, Alice S.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Academy of Science. Excerpt from Women, work and wages: Equal work for jobs of comparable value. The Comparable Worth Issue. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of National Affairs, November 7, 1981.Google Scholar
Piaget, Jean. 1932. The moral judgment of the child. Repr. 1965. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Regan, Donald H. 1979. Rewriting Roe v. Wade. Michigan Law Review 77(7).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scales, Ann. 1980-81. Towards a feminist jurisprudence. Indiana Law Review 56.Google Scholar
Williams, Wendy. 1982. The equality crisis: Some reflections on culture, courts, and feminism. Women's Rights Law Reporter 7(3).Google Scholar
Wolgast, Elizabeth. 1980. Equality and the rights of women. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Yale Law Journal Note. 1985. Employment equality under the pregnancy discrimination act of 1978. 94 (4).Google Scholar