ILLUSTRATING FEMINIST THEORY

Feminist theory holds that many of the pathological behaviors observed in patients result from their position in the social hierarchy. The goals of the demonstration detailed in this article are to show the impact of current gender roles on the psychological well-being of women and men and to generate understanding and discussion of the problems that relative status can create in the therapeutic relationship. This teaching demonstration draws parallels between the Zimbardo (1971) prison experiment and the impact that assignment to low-and high-power roles can have on the psychological health of women and men. Students are asked to rate men and women on some of the diagnostic criteria that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) associates with Axis I and II diagnoses. The students watch a video of Zimbardo's prison study and then rate the prisoners and guards. This demonstration provides another explanation for gender patterns in psychopathology by demonstrating that psychologically healthy White males will develop different patterns of psychopathology depending on whether they are placed in a dominant or subordinate role. When placed in the subordinate role, they exhibit behaviors typically seen in women clients; when placed in a dominant role they exhibit behaviors commonly associated with male clients. This exercise demonstrates the unhealthy nature of the gender roles for both women and men.     

Rawlsian Civic Education: Political not Minimal

abstract In Political Liberalism and later work John Rawls has recast his theory of justice as fairness in political terms. In order to illustrate the advantages of a liberal political approach to justice over liberal non‐political ones, Rawls discusses what kind of education might be required for future citizens of pluralistic and democratic societies. He advocates a rather minimal conception of civic education that he claims to derive from political liberalism. One group of authors has sided with Rawls’ political perspective and educational proposal, holding that a political approach and educational requirements that are not too demanding would have the advantage of being acceptable to a wide range of citizens with different religious, moral and philosophical perspectives. A second group of authors have criticized Rawls’ educational recommendations, holding that the production of a just society composed of reasonable citizens requires a more demanding civic education and, hence, that the political approach is not viable. The present paper argues that both groups are only partially right, and that there is a third way to understand civic education in Rawlsian terms, a way that is political but not minimal.