Self-Determination or Exploitation? The Feminist Debate on Surrogacy
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Within feminism there is no unified perspective on surrogate pregnancy (SP). Feminist disagreement generally translates into a debate between defending autonomy and protection from exploitation and oppression. This formula, however, overlooks the common feminist framework of the debate, within which limiting oppression and promoting women’s autonomy should be considered shared goals. I will advance the debate by analyzing these shared objectives by appealing to contemporary literature on personal autonomy. I will argue that the models of autonomy assumed by those who defend SP as a form of self-determination mask significant forms of oppression in contemporary contexts and that it is only by adopting a particular conception of autonomy that feminist proposals contrary to SP can be seen as hostile to autonomy. I conclude that reflecting and legislating on SP requires models of autonomy that are sensitive to different forms of oppression.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Esta es una publicación bajo la licencia Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC- ND 4.0). Para mayor información sobre el uso no comercial de los contenidos que aquí aparecen, favor de consultar http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
References
Bartky, Sandra L. 1990. Femininity and Domination, Nueva York, Routledge.
Benson, Paul. 1991. “Autonomy and Oppressive Socialization”, Social Theory and Practice, vol. 17, núm. 3, pp. 385-408.
Benson, Paul. 2000. “Feeling Crazy: Self Worth and the Social Character of Responsibility”, en Catriona Mackenzie y Natalie Stoljar (comp.), Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self, Nueva York, Oxford University Press, pp. 72-93.
Bhattacharya, Tithi. 2017. Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression [e-book], Londres, Pluto Press.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1997. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics”, en Karen Maschke (comp.), Feminist Legal Theories, Nueva York, Routledge, pp. 23-51.
Denny, Elaine. 1994. “Liberation or Oppression? Radical Feminism and In Vitro Fertilization”, Sociology of Health and Illness, vol. 16, núm. 1, pp .62-80.
Dworkin, Gerald. 1976. “Autonomy and Behavior Control”, The Hastings Center Report, vol. 6, núm. 1, pp. 23-28.
Finlayson, Lorna. 2016. An Introduction to Feminism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Khader, Serene J. 2011. Adaptive Preferences and Women's Empowerment, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Lamm, Eleonora. 2012. Gestación por sustitución. Ni maternidad subrogada ni alquiler de vientres (vol. 2), Barcelona, Edicions Universitat Barcelona.
Lewis, Sophie. 2019. Full Surrogacy Now: Feminism Against Family [e-book], Londres, Verso.
Marway, Herheet y Heather Widdows. 2015. “Philosophical Feminist Bioethics: Past, Present, and Future”, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, vol. 24, núm. 2, pp. 165-174.
Oksala, Johanna. 2011. “The Neoliberal Subject of Feminism”, Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, vol. 1, núm. 42, pp. 104-120.
Oksala, Johanna. 2014. “In Defense of Experience”, Hypatia, vol. 29, núm. 2, pp. 388-403.
Olavarría, María Eugenia. 2023. “Todxs somos subrogadxs” (reseña de Lewis 2019), Debate Feminista, vol. 66, pp. 1-10. https://doi.org/10.22201/cieg.2594066xe.2023.66.2369
Oshana, Marina. 2006. Personal Autonomy in Society, Aldershot, Ashgate.
Pande, Amrita., 2014. Wombs in Labor: Transnational Commercial Surrogacy in India, Nueva York, Columbia University Press.
Pérez Hernández, Yolinliztli. 2018. “Gestación subrogada: una revisión etnográfica para contribuir al debate en México”, Debate feminista, vol. 56, pp. 85-109. https://doi.org/10.22201/cieg.2594066xe.2018.56.05
Rodríguez Apólito, Maite. 2022. “Against Authenticity: Autonomy and Oppressive Circumstances”, Philosophy and Social Criticism, vol. 50, núm. 5, pp. 803-822. https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537221133485
Scott, Joan W. 1991. “The Evidence of Experience”, Critical inquiry, vol. 17, núm. 4, pp. 773-797.
Segalen, Martine (entrevista). 2019. “Quelques questions à Martine Segalen, ethnologue opposée à la GPA”, À gauche (en línea). Disponible en <https://agauche.org/2019/09/25/quelques-questions-a-martine-segalen-ethnologue-opposee-a-la-gpa/#:~:text=Nous%20avons%20posé%20quelques%20questions,et%20aux%20couples%20de%20lesbiennes>.
Segalen, Martine. 2006. “De l’invisibilité dans la domination à la visibilité dans l’égalité? La place des femmes dans les sciences sociales en France”, Memoria y Civilización, núm. 9, pp. 139-170.
Segalen, Martine. 2017. “Why There Can Be no Such Thing as ‘Ethical’ Surrogacy”, Travail, genre et sociétés, vol. 38, núm. 2, pp. 53-73.
Segalen, Martine. 2021. “Deconstructing Social Anthropology Discourses in Their Support of Surrogacy: The Case of France”, Current Sociology Monograph, vol. 69, núm. 2, pp. 176-192.
Stoljar, Natalie. 2000. “Autonomy and the Feminist Intuition”, en Catriona Mackenzie y Natalie Stoljar (comp.), Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self, Nueva York, Oxford University Press, pp. 94-111.
Young, Iris Marion. 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference, Princeton, Princeton University Press.