Abstract

This is an entry into the contemporary debate over contractarian theories of political obligation, with a particular focus on the "liberal" feminist critiques. It analyzes three prominent feminist critics of contractarianism, Susan Moller Okin, Carole Pateman and Nancy Hirschmann, selected because they each try to remain within the main premises and methodology of contractarian liberalism. The conclusion is that Okin's critique is too generous, Pateman's is radically incomplete, and Hirschmann's is too radical. ;It reviews the few remarks in the works of Thomas Hobbes directed to issues of gender and families, and speculates that his originality might have been stimulated by a contemporary debate about gender in Seventeenth Century England. An appendix reviews the debate for its political contents. ;The analysis then turns to contractarianism in the contemporary mode of game theory. The contractarian exercise establishes the state of nature scenario, introduces male and female players, and characterizes the females as smaller, weaker, and vulnerable in childbirth and nursing. It then varies the players' moral psychologies along the egoism/altruism continuum. The exercise then applies the assumptions of contractarian game theory to analyze how a two-gender population would deal with the problems of violence and heterosexual sexual intercourse. The analysis concludes that the best strategy for females in contractarian terms is collective action and that institutions of the social contract state can be evaluated according to whether the institutions inhibit or advance that possibility. It then applies such an analysis to the theories of Robert Nozick and John Rawls and finally to three institutions of the liberal contractarian state: territorial representation, sexual individualism and individualism in employment. ;The work concludes that both theories and institutions are inadequate to provide for gender equality, because each is hostile to female collective action, the theories because of their insistence on the primacy of freedom over equality and the institutions because of their particular effects on the elements of cooperation