Broadly at Vice.Com

photoI provided comment and analysis for an article on the sharing economy by Sirin Kale at Broadly, titled “ ‘There was a Stranger in My Own House’: Is the Sharing Economy Safe for Women?”. You can read the article here.

Women and minorities appear more likely to experience violence and discrimination on platforms like Uber and Airbnb. How did the gig economy go so wrong?

99 Women for Refugee Women

Clare ChambersI am one of Women for Refugee Women’s 99 Women speaking out against detention for refugee women. You can see the other women here.

We asked 99 inspiring women to write a message in support of refugee women, to reflect the 99 pregnant women who were detained in Yarl’s Wood detention centre in 2014. These women include Charlotte Church, Romola Garai, Malorie Blackman, Yasmin Kadi, Noma Dumezweni, Nimco Ali, Caitlin Moran, Bridget Christie, Baroness Valerie Amos, Yvette Cooper MP, Juliet Stevenson, Mary Beard, Sophie Walker, Anoushka Shankar, Caroline Spelman MP, Oona King, Bryony Hannah, and Caroline Lucas MP.

Philosophers on same-sex marriage at Daily Nous

header-w-sub-daily-nousI am one of a panel of philosophers discussing the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage at the Daily Nous blog. You can read it here.

On Friday, June 26th, the Supreme Court of the United States announced its ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, holding that the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the recognition and provision of same-sex marriage. It requires each of the 50 states in the US to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples seeking them, and to recognize legitimate same-sex marriages  performed in other jurisdictions. … The decision is a landmark in the development of the rights and liberties of gay and lesbian people in the US, and is not without its controversy, of course. Many questions have arisen about the reasoning of the majority and that of the dissenting justices, as well as the significance of the decision. To get clearer on some of these issues, [Daily Nous] asked several philosophers to contribute some brief remarks on the ruling. They are: Elizabeth Brake (Arizona State), Cheshire Calhoun (Arizona State), Clare Chambers (Cambridge), John Corvino (Wayne State), Brook Sadler (South Florida), Edward Stein(Cardozo), and Kevin Vallier (Bowling Green). 

Seminar in Contemporary Political Thought LT 2016

University-Cambridge-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ce.XYF4Slmu5oAll sessions are held in the Coleridge Room of Jesus College, Cambridge at 1-2.30pm.

15th January

Ruth Kinna, Loughborough University
Anarchist Feminism/Anarchism and Feminism: Waves, Exclusions and Intersections

29th January

Catherine Lu, McGill University
Reparations and Historic Injustice

12th February

Alan Finlayson, University of East Anglia
Parody and Political Speech

26th February

Mihaela Mihai, University of Edinburgh
The Art of Solidarity

Seminar in Contemporary Political Thought (MT 2015)

University-Cambridge-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ce.XYF4Slmu5oThe seminars will take place on Fridays between 1.00-2.30pm in the Coleridge Room, Jesus College. All are welcome.

Convenors: Dr Clare Chambers (Philosophy) and Dr Duncan Bell (POLIS)

 

9th October

Adam Swift, Warwick University,
Family Values

 23rd October

Jonathan Wolff, University College London
Forms of Differential Social Inclusion

6th November

Marc Stears, University of Oxford & Former Chief Speechwriter for Ed Miliband
It’s Not Just the Politics That are Missing:Realist Political Theory and the Everyday

 20th November

Lea Ypi, London School of Economics
Revolutionary Partisanship

 

Nuffield Council on Bioethics Working Party on Cosmetic Procedures

nuffieldI am a member of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics Working Party on Cosmetic Procedures. You can find more about the project, including the other members, here.

Invasive cosmetic procedures are becoming increasingly popular and accessible in the UK, prompting questions about potential risks to users and the lack of regulation and professional standards in this area.

This project will explore ethical issues in cosmetic procedures with a particular focus on the role and responsibilities of health and scientific professionals and others in responding to demand for invasive non-reconstructive procedures that aim to enhance or normalise appearance.

The Limitations of Contract: Regulating Personal Relationships in the Marriage-Free State

9780190205072-2Many theorists defend relationship contracts. Some argue that enforceable relationship contracts should be available alongside existing or reformed state-recognised marriage, and available to either married or unmarried couples. Other theorists argue that relationship contracts are the best sort of legal regulation to replace marriage. It is this latter question that is the subject of this chapter. The chapter contrasts contract and directive models of regulation, and notes that contract appears more compatible with liberty than does directive. However this appearance is illusory since contracts can undermine liberty, directives can enhance liberty, and even a contract regime requires default directives. Moreover, there are various problems with the enforcement of relationship contracts. Specific performance is rarely appropriate in the relationship context. The alternative, fault-based compensatory alimony, risks causing injustice to vulnerable parties such as those who take on caring responsibilities (usually women) and children. Relational contract theory attempts to deal with some of these problems but has its own limitations. The chapter concludes that contract is not the best replacement for marriage.

Reviewers’ comments:

The book is “strenuously avant-garde”. The New York Times (5th April 2016).

Chambers’ chapter is “sobering and refreshing”. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews (2nd May 2016).

Chambers, “one of the best-known advocates” of the claim that marriage should not be recognised by the state, contributes a “nuanced and lucid” chapter that is “among the most interesting contributions in the volume.”  Hypatia (2017)

 You can read more about the book here.

Feminism and Liberalism

In Routledge Companion to Feminist Philosophy, edited by Serene Khader, Ann Gary, and Alison Stone (Routledge, 2017).

For some feminists liberalism is little more than patriarchy in disguise; for others, it is the framework for securing justice. Feminism, like all other positions in political philosophy, is a range of views rather than a single determinate viewpoint. One aspect of this range is that feminism includes both academics and activists, for whom the term ‘liberalism’ can signify rather different things; after all, liberalism is not one single thing either.

In this chapter I start by considering feminist criticisms of liberalism. I discuss two aspects of feminist critique: first, academic feminist critiques of non-feminist liberal philosophy; second, activist feminist critiques of what is variously called “choice feminism”, “third-wave feminism”, or simply “liberal feminism”.

I then move to those feminists who endorse liberalism and argue that a suitably modified liberalism offers the best path to gender equality. This position, “feminist liberalism,” is mostly found in contemporary Anglo-American political philosophy. Feminist liberals understand liberalism as a commitment to substantive, demanding principles of justice based on freedom and equality. Included in this section are those feminist approaches that combine radical feminism’s insights about the limitations of individual choice with feminist liberalism’s commitment to autonomy, equality, and justice.

See more about the book here.

David Miller Conference

10645217_10100822349433872_8133711624700875152_nI was neither an organiser or paper-giver at this conference for David Miller in May 2015, but I was honoured and delighted to give a toast to David, who supervised my DPhil with Lois McNay. Thanks to Chris Bertram for the photo, and to Dan Butt, Sarah Fine and Zofia Stemplowska for organising the conference.

Political Theory and Impact Roundtable

HOL_logoI was part of a roundtable on Political Theory and Impact in March 2015, run by the PSA and held at the House of Lords. The participants were:

Lord Parekh FBA (chair)
Prof Thom Brooks (Law, Durham)
Dr Clare Chambers (Philosophy, Cambridge)
Prof Elizabeth Frazer (Politics, Oxford)
Dr Emily McTernan (Political Science, UCL)

Dr Martin O’Neill (Politics, York)
Prof Michael Otsuka (Philosophy, LSE)
Prof Albert Weale (Political Science, UCL)

Dpsa_logo_pos_new-1024x268etails are here.

 

WOW festival

untitled-1_1

I spoke at the WOW – Women of the World – Festival in Cambridge in March 2015, on a panel on Women’s Bodies, Private Places.

Women’s bodies, who do they belong to? A wide- ranging, multi-generational and diverse panel will explore issues around life as a woman. From boobs and body hair to body image and periods, how have attitudes changed and who decides what’s ‘right’? In conversation will be Dr Clare Chambers, author of ‘Fat is a Feminist Issue’ Susie Orbach, Roz Hardie, CEO of campaign group Object, Debra Bourne from All Walks Beyond the Catwalk, poet, singer, writer and actor Keisha Thompson, Alice Wroe from the Herstory project, trans woman Dr Rachael Padman and Becky Talbot from Dhiverse.

See the programme here.

Seminar in Contemporary Political Thought (LT 2015)

University-Cambridge-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ce.XYF4Slmu5oThe seminars will take place on Fridays between 1.00-2.30pm in the Coleridge Room, Jesus College. All are welcome.

Convenors: Dr Clare Chambers (Philosophy) and Dr Duncan Bell (POLIS)

16th January: Hillel Steiner, University of Manchester
Levels of Non-Ideality 

30th January: Jeff McMahan, University of Oxford
Liability, Proportionality, and the Number of Aggressors

 13th February: Kimberlee Brownlee, University of Warwick
Social Contribution Injustice

 27th February: Andrea Sangiovanni, King’s College, London
Moral Equality, Respect, and Cruelty

Seminar in Contemporary Political Thought (MT 2014)

University-Cambridge-logo.jpg.pagespeed.ce.XYF4Slmu5oFaculty of Philosophy and POLIS

Convenors: Dr Clare Chambers (Philosophy) and Dr Duncan Bell (POLIS)

The seminars take place on alternate Fridays between 1.00-2.30pm in the Coleridge Room, Jesus College. All are welcome.

Michaelmas Term 2014

10th October (week 1)
Miriam Ronzoni, University of Manchester
“Republicanism and Global Politics: Three Requirements in Tension”

24th October (week 3)
Elizabeth Frazer, University of Oxford
“Reading Shakespeare Politically”

7th November (week 5)
Tracy Strong, UC San Diego
“Where Do We Find Ourselves? Hawthorne and the Actuality of Political Space”

21st November (week 7)
Moya Lloyd, Loughborough University
“Naming Absence: The Politics of Body Counts”

Seminar in Contemporary Political Thought (MT 2014)

Convenors: Dr Clare Chambers (Philosophy) and Dr Duncan Bell (POLIS)

The seminars take place on alternate Fridays between 1.00-2.30pm in the Coleridge Room, Jesus College. All are welcome.

Michaelmas Term 2014

10th October (week 1)
Miriam Ronzoni, University of Manchester
“Republicanism and Global Politics: Three Requirements in Tension”

24th October (week 3)
Elizabeth Frazer, University of Oxford
“Reading Shakespeare Politically”

7th November (week 5)
Tracy Strong, UC San Diego
“Where Do We Find Ourselves? Hawthorne and the Actuality of Political Space”

21st November (week 7)
Moya Lloyd, Loughborough University
“Naming Absence: The Politics of Body Counts”

The Marriage-Free State

AS-logoProceedings of The Aristotelian Society (2013). This paper sets out the case for abolishing state-recognised marriage and replacing it with piecemeal regulation of personal relationships. It starts by analysing feminist objections to traditional marriage, and argues that the various feminist critiques can best be reconciled and answered by the abolition of state-recognised marriage. The paper then considers the ideal form of state regulation of personal relationships. Contra other recent proposals equality and liberty are not best served by the creation of a new holistic status, such as civil union, or by leaving regulation to private contracts. Instead, the state should develop piecemeal regulations that apply universally. You can read the paper and listen to the podcast here or on the OUP Philosophy Festival Reading List here.