首页> 外文期刊>Bioethics >Upsetting the balance on sex selection
【24h】

Upsetting the balance on sex selection

机译:扰乱性别选择的平衡

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

It is widely assumed that the strongest case for permitting non-medical sex selection is where parents aim at family balance. This piece criticizes one representative attempt to justify sex selection for family balance. Kluge (2007) assumes that some couples may seek sex selection because they hold discriminatory values, but this need not impugn those who merely have preferences, without evaluative commitments, for a particular sex. This is disputed by those who see any sex selection as inherently sexist because it upholds stereotypes about the sexes. This article takes an alternative approach. I argue that, even if we accept that preference-based selection is unobjectionable, a policy permitting selection for family balancing does a poor job of distinguishing between value-based and preference-based selection. If we wish to permit only preference-based sex selection we should seek to identify parents' motives. If we wish to justify a family balancing policy, other arguments are needed.
机译:众所周知,允许非医学性别选择的最强烈案例是父母瞄准家庭平衡的地方。这件作品批评了一个代表试图证明为家庭平衡的性别选择。 Kluge(2007)假设有些夫妻可能会寻求性别选择,因为它们持有歧视价值,但这不需要对特定性别进行评估承诺的偏好而受到影响。这是由那些看到任何性别选择的人都有争议,因为它坚持了关于性别的刻板印象。本文采取替代方法。我争辩说,即使我们接受基于偏好的选择是不可禁令的,允许为家庭平衡选择的策略允许区分基于价值和基于偏好的选择的差。如果我们希望只允许基于偏好的性别选择,我们应该寻求识别父母的动机。如果我们希望证明一个家庭平衡政策,需要其他参数。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号