Free beta access. 50 free AI tokens each week. Optional top-ups available. See what is included
Opening Word document…

The counterplan does not solve stereotypes – a UBS does not trust recipients to spend a basic income wisely

Flanigan, 2018 - prof of leadership studies and law at the University of Richmond [Jessica, Jan 25, Slate “The Feminist Case for a Universal Basic Income” https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/01/the-feminist-case-for-universal-basic-income.html Acc 3/23/23 TA]

3. Respect: Universal, Rather Than Targeted Assistance, Will Defy Stereotypes Historically, feminists not only critiqued outright sexism but also the paternalism of efforts to protect women from the world by robbing them of their autonomy. Paternalism has long been used to justify policies that limit women’s and other marginalized people’s choices, like bans on abortion, or sex work, or women working in dangerous industries, on the grounds that they are incapable of deciding for themselves how to live their lives. Today, many social policies in the U.S. are influenced by extremely paternalistic thinking that perpetuates discriminatory stereotypes about women’s abilities to make informed and reasonable decisions for themselves. Conservative complaints about welfare recipients spending benefits on junk food and luxuries have been part of a more general racialized narrative, which has informed existing welfare policy and also perpetuated offensive and stigmatizing stereotypes about members of marginalized groups, especially women of color. But liberals who support limiting the provision of benefits to housing, food, and health care are subject to the same charges of paternalism when they advocate for in-kind benefit policies (such as food transfers and food vouchers) that perpetuate a politics of suspicion and mistrust, instead of supporting cash benefit programs.

Sign in to recut, update, or save this card.