öbmnbmnb

“In this world, a man, himself, is nothing. And there
ain’t no world but this one.”

(The Thin Red Line – 1998)

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

            The
Thin Red Line is one of the stunning movies about World War II with thrilling
conflict scenes and exciting war spirit (The Thin Red Line, 1999). Also, it has many
realistic acts which make you feel the all agony, urgency and misery of those
soldiers have because of the war environment. Considering it’s a military
movie, it’s not surprising that most of the performers are actors. So that it’s
not very difficult to feel the masculinity while watching it. However, if we
can catch a good point of view, we will see that all those agonies and miseries
are actually the product of a long process of that masculinity.

 

            Cinema
is one of the most stimulating branches of art, if you are a hawk-eyed watcher.
Most of the times it adapts the reality into a screenplay. Let’s tackle the
military movies again. All we have that stereotyped picture in our memories of
a nurse dressing a wound of an injured soldier. It seems like a very ordinary
scene for the most of us. However, have we ever thought why this seems so
natural to us? Many people may claim that males are physically more
advantageous than females and that’s why females would be more useful at the
backstage of the battlefield for other chores such as nursing injured soldiers,
cooking, preparing materials and so on. However, many philosophers don’t think
so.

 

            Traditional
moral philosophy has been shaped for centuries by philosophers that majority of
them are males. Yet we see that, even though there are very different kind of
approaches, “care” perspective is neglected or given insufficient recognition
by mainstream moral theories. So that, it wouldn’t be inaccurate if we call it
“masculine morality”. And this masculine morality is the source of current
inequitable world. Why? Because when we examine the historical background of all
societies on the earth, we face with dozens of wars, invasions, plunders and
all kind of destructive actions. And of course, most of these events took place
before twentieth century when women had very limited effect on decision making
policies and moral philosophy. Hereat, masculine morality spread everywhere as
destruction for sake of power, authority, victory and so on. Anyhow, humanity
always found a way to build up and create new civilizations. However, here we
must draw attention to the source and agent of this constructive turnabout. In
most of the cases, women were the ones who constituted the rebirth of damaged
and wounded societies. And they didn’t do it for sake of some kind of will to
power or authority but the care instinct prompted them to cure, recuperate and
recover. From this point forth, the care approach can be entitled as “feminine
morality”.

 

            From
a historical perspective, we can claim that Western modern theory is a result
of this masculine morality. So that liberalism is glorified product of this
philosophy which has strong rational basis (McLean & McMillan, 2009). Economic
liberalism, is an economic system organized on individual lines, which means
the greatest possible number of economic decisions are made by individuals or households than
by collective institutions or organizations (Adams, 2001). And from the economic view, economic liberalism would
seem like the most profitable system. United States of America is one of the
best examples to talk about economic liberalism. It constituted its economy
based on, so called one of the most rationalist system, liberal economy and
gained one of the largest economies on the world (World Economic Outlook
Database, 2016).
However, can we assume that United States is one of the most equitable states
according to economic conditions? I think anyone who has some knowledge about the
life in United States would say that this would be a mistake. The richest 1% of
the American population in 2007 owned 34.6% of the country’s total wealth, and
the next 19% owned 50.5%. Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the
country’s wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15% (Wolff, 2010). Also, homeless
people are serious problem which their situation is getting worse (Gee, 2017). In 2012, President
Barrack Obama, who singed health insurance law so called “Obamacare” (Wallace, 2012), was accused of
being a communist by some right-wing groups.

 

            Considering
all these data, implementation of the most liberal policies may not be enough
to create an equitable society. Let’s take a look at another side of Atlantic.
When we look at Nordic countries, such as Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland,
we would see much more equitable and just society. These states are welfare
states where concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the
protection and promotion of the social and economic well-being of its citizens (The Editors
of Encyclopædia Britannica, 2015). The Nordic model
has been successful at significantly reducing poverty (Drum, 2013). In this point of
view, we can say that these states have more sustainable systems and public
orders. In this context, we can say that the states who have
feminine morality and care approach are more likely to have just societies and
healthy individuals. That’s why it seems like more beneficial in the long term.

 

            For another
aspect of this debate, Immanuel Kant claimed that women needed the guidance of
more “rational” males (Kant). Males and females
are different creatures both physiologically and psychologically and it’s
natural that this kind of distinctions create different result. For instance, while
female jealousy is more likely to be inspired by emotional infidelity, male
jealousy is most likely to be brought on by sexual infidelity (Pietrzak, Laird,
Stevens, & Thompson, 2002). Even though it’s a
debated issue, we can say that women are more emotional creatures rather than
men and this situation might make men seem like more rational. Also, men may
have rational sense in relationships as women consider them from emotional
side.

 

I came up with another movie which argues one of the most controversial
debates in relationships between men and women. The Unbearable Lightness of
Being is a 1988 American film adaptation of the novel of the same name by Milan
Kundera, published in 1984 (Rotten Tomatoes, 2008). And Tereza asks Tomas that controversial question that “How can someone
make love without being in love?” as Tomas considers love and sex are
independent notions that he sees sex as an entertainment as light as football.
However, Tereza, as a woman, considers sex as interdepent with love. I think this debate tells us
so much about all conflicts between masculine justice perspective and feminine
care perspective in the terms of morality, ethics and so on.

 

To sum up,
we can say that there is no doubt about justice will be considered as one eyed
without care perspective as happened during the world history for centuries.
Rationality will always require the sense of care as leverage to provide a just
system. Otherwise it won’t be a surprise to see other examples like United
States where billionaires blame homeless and poor people for being lazy. Care
perspective always will be the savior of humanity when uncontrolled rational
desires start destructive conflicts and wars. Rationality will always be the naughty
boy of the house unless it’s been cared by a rigorous mother.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *