These are all great suggestions. People may be interesting that I have recently edited an issue of the journal Philosophical Topics on the topic of global gender justice. It should be available in Jan. Below I will paste the TOC with abstracts:

Introduction to the issue

The Philosophical Challenges of Global Gender Justice

By Alison M. Jaggar

Philosophy and Women and Gender Studies, University of Colorado at Boulder

 

Women and the Gendered Politics of Food

By Vandana Shiva

Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy, New Delhi, India

 

Abstract

From seed to table, the food chain is gendered. 

 

When seeds and food are in women’s hands, seeds reproduce and multiply freely, food is shared freely and respected. However, women’s seed and food economy has been discounted as “productive work”. Women’s seed and food knowledge has been discounted as knowledge. 

 

Globalization has led to the transfer of seed and food from women’s hands to corporate hands. Seed is now patented and genetically engineered. It is treated as the creation and “property” of corporations like Monsanto. Renewable seed becomes non-renewable. Sharing and saving seed becomes a crime. Diversity, nourished by centuries of women’s breeding, disappears, and with it the culture and natural evolution that is embodied in the diversity is lost forever.  

 

Food too is transformed in corporate hands. It is no longer our nourishment it becomes a commodity. And as a commodity it can be manipulated and monopolized of food grain sold to factory forms makes more money, it becomes cattle feed. If food grain converted to biofuel to run automobiles is more profitable, it become ethanol and biodiesel. 

 

The consequence is the disappearance of food for billions. The contemporary food riots due to rising prices signal a new period of food scarcity.  

 

Transnational Cycles of Gendered Vulnerability: A prologue to a theory of global gender injustice

By Alison M. Jaggar

Philosophy and Women and Gender Studies, University of Colorado at Boulder

 

Abstract

Across the world, the lives of men and women who are otherwise similarly situated tend to differ from each other systematically. Although gender disparities vary widely within and among regions, women everywhere are disproportionately vulnerable to poverty, abuse and political marginalization. This article proposes that global gender disparities are caused by a network of norms, practices, policies, and institutions that include transnational as well as national elements. These interlaced and interacting factors frequently modify and sometimes even reduce gendered vulnerabilities but their overall effect is to maintain and often intensify them. Women’s vulnerabilities in different areas of life mutually reinforce each other and I follow other authors in referring to such causal feedback loops as cycles of gendered vulnerability. I argue that these cycles now operate on a transnational as well as national scale and I illustrate this by discussing the examples of domestic work and sex work. If global institutional arrangements do indeed contribute to maintaining or intensifying distinctively gendered vulnerabilities, these arrangements deserve critical scrutiny from philosophers concerned with global justice.

 

Transnational Rights and Wrongs: Moral Geographies of Gender and Migration 

By Rachel Silvey

Associate Professor of Geography and Planning, University of Toronto, Canada.

 

Abstract

This article examines the challenges that transnational women’s migration poses to liberal, state-centered conceptions of rights. It reviews global perspectives on gender justice that are being developed by Western feminist philosophers and transnational migrant rights activists, and argues that these frameworks are contributing to imagining the moral geographies necessary for the protection of women migrants’ human rights and welfare. Specifically, based on discussion of the issues and strategies that Indonesian migrant workers’ organizations employ in relation to international human rights discourse, the article argues that adequate conceptualizations of justice must focus on the ways in which transnational gendered inequalities are produced—and indeed must be addressed— across ‘local’, ‘national’, and ‘global’ spaces and scales.  These arguments, now commonplace in the discipline of geography, are offered as an elaboration of the spatial elements of feminist philosophical conceptions of global justice.  

 

The Moral Harm of Migrant Carework: Realizing a Global Right to Care

By Eva Feder Kittay

Professor of Philosophy, State University of New York at Stonybrook, USA.

 

Abstract

Arlie Hochschild glosses the practice of women migrants in poor nations who leave their families behind for extended periods of time to do carework in other wealthier countries as a “global heart transplant” from poor to wealthy nations.  Thus she signals the idea of an injustice between nations and a moral harm for the individuals in the practice.  Yet the nature of the harm needs a clear articulation. When we posit a sufficiently nuanced “right to care,” we locate the harm to central relationships of the migrant women.  The “right to (give and receive) care” we develop uses a concept of a relational self drawn from an ethics of care.   The harm is the harm of broken relationships, which in turn have a serious impact on a person’s sense of equal dignity and self-respect, particularly since the sacrifice of central relationships of the migrant woman allows others (mostly women) to maintain these same relationships.

The paper ends with a brief discussion of some of solutions we need to consider.

 

Global Inequalities in Women's Health: Who is responsible for doing what?

By Ruth Macklin

Professor of Bioethics, Department of Epidemiology and Population Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA

 

Abstract

Empirical evidence confirms the existence of health inequalities between women and men in developing countries, with women experiencing poorer health status than men, as well as less access to vital health services. These disparities have different sources and take different forms, some of which result from cultural factors, others from discriminatory laws and practices, and still others from the biological fact that only women undergo pregnancy and childbirth, a major cause of maternal mortality. The injustice lies in the fact that many of these disparities result from socially controllable factors, while others could be remedied, especially in cases of violations of human rights. Past and current policies and practices of the United States government can be faulted for both actions and omissions that have contributed to such inequalities. Different conceptions of global justice have implications for who owes what to whom regarding these disparities.

 

Reforming our Taxation Arrangements to Promote Global Gender Justice

By Gillian Brock

Professor of Philosophy, University of Auckland, New Zealand

 

Abstract

In this article I examine how reforming our international tax regime could be an important vehicle for realizing key aspects of global gender justice. Ensuring all, including and especially multinationals, pay their fair share of taxes is crucial to ensuring that all countries, especially developing countries, are able to fund education, job training, infrastructural development, programs which promote gender-equity, and so forth, thereby enabling all countries to help themselves better.  I discuss various positive proposals for levying global taxes.  I review why overtly gender-neutral taxes can sometimes have unintended gendered consequences, disproportionately burdening or benefiting individuals, according to their gender.  Any endorsement of global taxes must take this concern into account.  Fortunately there is good fit between the rationale for the Tobin tax and the way in which it can be harnessed to promote gender-equity, so of the taxes discussed here, it emerges as one of the most promising.  However, as I also argue, eliminating tax havens and blocking avenues that currently facilitate tax escape must also be part of the agenda to promote gender-equity, given the vast amounts of revenue that currently escape taxation. In a context of globalization, fiscal policies cannot achieve equity (including gender-equity) at national levels alone.  Many concerns, such as clamping down on tax evasion and harmonizing corporate tax rates can only effectively be tackled at a global level. As I also discuss, feasible arrangements for tackling such issues are available, as are mechanisms for collecting and disbursing funds in ways that promote accountability and compliance. Failing to reform our tax arrangements means that the basic institutional structure of the global economy is unjust and also involves gender injustice.  Gender consciousness is indispensable for developing an adequate account of taxation justice and therefore a global institutional structure that is gender just.

 

Discourses of Sexual Violence in a Global Framework

By Linda Alcoff

Professor of Philosophy, Hunter College, City University of New York, USA

 

In this paper I make a preliminary analysis of western (or global north) discourses on sexual violence, focusing on the important concepts of "consent" and "victim." The concept of "consent" is widely used to determine whether sexual violence has occurred, and is the focal point of debates over the legitimacy of statutory offences and over the way we characterize sex work done under conditions involving economic desperation. The concept of "victim" is shunned by many feminists and non-feminists alike for its apparent eclipse of agency.

 

Putting these concepts into a global framework sheds light on their limitations. Bringing in the debate over the concept "Honor crime" reveals contrasting assumptions about the nature of sexual violence. The comparative analysis used in this paper shows how we can avoid universalizing from specific frameworks, but also how we can learn from the discourses elsewhere toward developing an account of commonalities across contexts.

 

Ultimately I argue that in applications to sexual violence, "consent" has intrinsic limitations, "victim" has context-based dangers, and "honor crime" makes both correct as well as incorrect assumptions.

 

The Problem with Polygamy

By Thom Brooks

Reader in Political and Legal Philosophy,  Department of Geography, Politics and Sociology, University of Newcastle, UK,

 

Abstract

Polygamy is a hotly contested practice and open to widespread misunderstandings. This practice is defined as a relationship between either one husband and multiple wives or one wife and multiple husbands. Today, ‘polygamy’ almost exclusively takes the form of one husband with multiple wives. In this article, my focus will centre on limited defences of polygamy offered recently by Chesire Calhoun and Martha Nussbaum. I will argue that these defences are unconvincing. The problem with polygamy is primarily that it is a structurally inegalitarian practice in both theory and fact. Polygamy should be opposed for this reason. 

 

Feminist Paradigms of Solidarity and Justice

By Ann Ferguson

Professor Emerita of Philosophy and Women and Gender Studies, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, USA>

 

Abstract

My paper develops a new feminist paradigm for global justice that includes several components.  I deploy a non-ideal ethics approach based on an argument about what principle of justice is possible to act on, given a historical and intersectional feminist analysis of what kind of feminist coalitions are possible in the present period. I claim that the time is ripe for a new progressive feminist Solidarity paradigm of justice that supersedes the classical liberal debates between Libertarian Freedom paradigm and the Social Democrat Equality paradigm of Justice. I outline the anti-globalization economic and political networks coming into existence, as evidenced by networks of worker-owned cooperatives, labor unions, fair trade commitments, squatter and other land reform movements. Such movements are creating the material conditions in which North-South women's coalition movements, based not on essentialist but on transformational identities, can unite around various issues of global gender justice, including reproductive rights, environmental justice, and the feminization of poverty.

 

Feminist Theory, Global Gender Justice, and the Evaluation of Grant-Making

By Brooke Ackerly

Associate Professor of Political Science, Vanderbilt University, USA.

 

Abstract

In activist circles feminist political thought is often viewed as abstract because it does not help activists make the kinds of arguments that are generally effective with donors and policy makers. The feminist political philosopher’s focus on how we know and what counts as knowledge is a large step away from the terrain in which activists make their arguments to donors. Yet, philosophical reflection on the relations between power and knowledge can make a significant contribution to women’s human rights work in the area of evaluation. Feminist political philosophy can offer guidelines for how to evaluate the work of women’s human rights organizations and their funders in light of the social, political, and economic conditions that render their work necessary and difficult. This article offers 1) an account of the difficulty in showing the impact of social change activism using conventional modes of measurement, particularly those that focus on first order effects, 2) feminist theoretical insights into the interrelatedness of global gender injustices that may help us develop better benchmarks of evaluation for women’s human rights programming, and 3) a sketch of how to approach the evaluation of organizations and donors who seek to support global gender justice.

 

I have also written a number of articles in which people might be interested:

“Globalizing Feminist Ethics,” Hypatia, 13:2 (Spring, 1998) pp. 7-31.

__________ reprinted in Uma Narayan and Sandra Harding, eds., Decentering the Center: Philosophy for a Multicultural, Postcolonial, and Feminist World, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2000.

__________ reprinted in Cheshire Calhoun, ed., Setting the Moral Compass: Essays by Women Philosophers¸ Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004, pp. 233-255.

“Is Globalization Good for Women?” Comparative Literature 53:4 (2001) pp. 298-314.

        __________ reprinted in David Leiwei Li, ed. Globalization and the Humanities, Hong Kong University Press, 2004, pp. 37-57.

“A Feminist Critique of the Alleged Southern Debt,” in Birgit Christensen, Angelica Baum, Sidonia Blaettler, Anna Kusser, Irene Maria Marti, Briggitte Weisshaupt, eds., Wissen/Macht/Geschlecht: Philosophie und die Zukunft der “condition feminine,” Zuerich, SWITZERLAND: Chronos, 2002, pp. 19-40.

        __________  reprinted in Hypatia, 17:4 (Fall, 2002) 119-142.

        __________ reprinted (in Spanish translation) in Mora 8, (2002), Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA: Universidad de Buenos Aires.

 

“Vulnerable Women and Neo-liberal Globalization: Debt Burdens Undermine Women’s Health in the Global South,” Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 23:6 (2002) 425-440.

        __________ reprinted in Robin N. Fiore and Hilde Nelson, eds., Recognition, Responsibility and Rights: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003.

        __________ reprinted in German in Mechthild Nagel and Nina Zimnik, eds., Feministische Aufbreuche in die Postkoloniale, Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp Verlag, 2003.

“Challenging Women’s Global Inequalities: Some Priorities for Western Philosophers,” Philosophical Topics, 30:2 (fall, 2002) pp. 229-253.

        __________ “Gegen die weltweite Benachteiligung von Frauen: Einige Prioritaeten fuer die westliche Philosophie,” German translation in Deutsche Zeitschrift fuer Philosophie 51:4 (2003) 485-609.

“Arenas of Citizenship: Civil Society, State and the Global Order,” International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7:1, March, 2005, 1-24.

        _________   reprinted in Marilyn Friedman, ed. Women and Citizenship, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. 150-188.

“Western Feminism and Global Responsibility,” Feminist Interventions in Ethics and Politics, edited by Barbara S. Andrew, Jean Keller, and Lisa H. Schwartzman, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005, 185-200.

“’Saving Amina:’ Global Justice for Women and Intercultural Dialogue,” Ethics and International Affairs 19:3, fall 2005, 85-105.

        __________ reprinted in Real World Justice, edited by Andreas Follesdal and Thomas Pogge, Springer Verlag, 2005, 36-62.

        ­­­­­­__________ reprinted in Portugese translation in Saberes e fazeres de genero: entre o loal e o global, eds Luzinete Simeos Minella and Susana Borneo Funck, Florianopolis, BRAZIL: University Press of Santa Catarina.

        __________ reprinted in Global Ethics: Seminal Essays, edited by Thomas Pogge and Keith Horton, St. Paul, MN: Paragon, 2008.

Reasoning About Well-Being: Nussbaum’s Methods of Justifying the Capabilities,” The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14:4 2006, 301-322.

Finally, my contribution to the co-authored OUP book, ABORTION: THREE PERSPECTIVES, presents abortion rights as human rights (to life, liberty, and bodily integrity) and as a matter of global gender justice (rather than as a matter of personal ethics)

I hope some of these are helpful. It is exciting to see the wealth of material that has been produced over the past ten years.

Best,

Alison.--
Alison M. Jaggar
College Professor of Distinction
University of Colorado at Boulder
Philosophy and Women and Gender Studies
Boulder, CO 80309-0232
303-492-8997 (direct line)
303-492-6132 (dept. office)
303-492-8386 (fax)