Bioethics 15 (3):205–217 (2001)

Donna Dickenson
Birkbeck, University of London
There is an urgent need for reconstructing models of property to make them more women-friendly. However, we need not start from scratch: both ‘canonical’ and feminist authors can sometimes provide concepts which we can refine and apply towards women’s propertylessness. This paper looks in particular at women’s alienation from their reproductive labour, building on Marx and Delphy. Developing an economic and political rather than a psychological reading of alienation, it then considers how the refined and revised concept can be applied to concrete examples in global justice for women: in particular, the commercialisation of embryonic and fetal tissue in the new stem cell technologies.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/1467-8519.00232
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,114
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Sexual Contract.Carole Pateman - 1990 - Ethics 100 (3):658-669.
A Theory of Property.Stephen R. Munzer - 1990 - Cambridge University Press.
On Psychological Oppression.Sandra Bartky - 1979 - Southwestern Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):190-190.
A Theory of Property.Stephen R. Munzer - 1991 - Mind 100 (2):300-302.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Lady Vanishes: What’s Missing From the Stem Cell Debate.Donna L. Dickenson - 2006 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 3 (1-2):43-54.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
54 ( #208,349 of 2,499,061 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #278,516 of 2,499,061 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes