https://www.rightspedia.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Freedom_of_Association%2FPhilosophical_Origins%2FTradition_contributions%2FFeminist_Thought 2026-05-02T02:53:10Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.38.2 https://www.rightspedia.org/index.php?title=Freedom_of_Association/Philosophical_Origins/Tradition_contributions/Feminist_Thought&diff=18742&oldid=prev 2022-12-28T22:08:59Z

<p>transformed</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{Right section<br /> |right=Freedom of Association<br /> |section=Philosophical Origins<br /> |question=Tradition contributions<br /> |questionHeading=What have religious and philosophical traditions contributed to our understanding of this right?<br /> |pageLevel=Breakout<br /> |breakout=Feminist Thought<br /> |contents=Harriet Taylor, a feminist philosopher from the 19th century, wrote about the restrictions that limit women to the private sphere. Men, according to Taylor, decided that the private and domestic sphere is women’s “proper sphere”; however, she argues that any group’s proper sphere is the “largest and highest which they are able to attain to” (Taylor). Taylor argues that this is not possible without complete liberty and, if men are convinced of their mental superiority, should not be an issue if women and men are afforded the same opportunities (Taylor). This argument can be adapted to freedom of association because it essentially concludes that both women and men have the equal opportunity to associate with organizations if he or she can prove his or her worth. <br /> <br /> In the Constitution, there are two interpreted freedom of associations. The First Amendment includes the freedom of expressive association. The Fourteenth Amendment includes the freedom of intimate association. Intimate association is an individual’s right to form/maintain close personal relationships without interference from the government (Hudson, [[Probable year:: 2009]]) . Expressive association, recognized in NAACP v. Alabama ([[Probable year:: 1958]]) , refers to the right of individuals to congregate or association for expressive purposes, such as advancing a political opinion (Hudson, [[Probable year:: 2009]]) . In Roberts v. United States Jaycees ([[Probable year:: 1984]]) , Justice Brennan wrote the majority opinion. Brennan concluded that the Jaycees could not exclude women from membership because their purpose as an economic organization for the advancement of young men was not jeopardized if women were members (Bernstein, [[Probable year:: 2009]]) . Justice O’Connor concurred, but distinguished between expressive and non-expressive groups, which exist for other purposes (Bernstein, [[Probable year:: 2009]]) . O’Connor concluded that the Jaycees primarily existed for economic reasons, not expressive ones, and, as such, could not exclude women on the basis that it would compromise their mission (Bernstein, [[Probable year:: 2009]]) .<br /> <br /> <br /> }}</div>

Import-sysop