Abstract:

I argue that Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen’s theory of group discrimination is open to the critique that it can’t capture certain kinds of injustices. I argue that this critique shows that his theory is narrower than he thinks and that this raises the question whether he can really meet his own desideratum for his project. I do this by discussing an objection raised by Catherine MacKinnon against the concept of discrimination: It is based on an account of equality which focuses on equal treatment. This is problematic since equal treatment doesn’t necessarily lead to gender equality. The reason is that equal treatment against what might be seen as gender neutral practices and rules, often means equal treatment against a standard that is made in consideration of men, instead of men and women. I call this critique the Equal Treatment Objection. Lippert-Rasmussen states that he can meet the Equal Treatment Objection. I discuss this objection by focusing on a case inspired by MacKinnon’s critique. I argue that he can’t see this case as indirect discrimination and the reason is that one condition in his definition of indirect discrimination, the causal condition, is not fulfilled. I finally focus on three possible solutions he can take to answer this objection and discuss problems with these solutions.