“Implicit Racism” by Sara Ann Ketchum And Christine Pierce: Summary and Critique

1. Implicit Racism in Defenses of Sexism

• The article argues that many justifications for sexism are implicitly racist because they rely on principles that could also be used to justify racial discrimination (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 91).
• The authors examine three common defenses of sexist practices:
  • The Conservative Defense
  • The Pseudo-Liberal Defense
  • The Libertarian Defense

---

2. The Conservative Defense: Tradition as Justification for Discrimination

• This argument claims that established prejudices should be preserved in law and policy.
• J.R. Lucas argues that sexist employment policies are justified because people “recognise that a person’s sex can reasonably be regarded as relevant to his or her suitability for particular posts” (Lucas, 1973, pp. 166-168, cited in Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 92).
• The authors point out that this reasoning could also justify racial discrimination, as some people historically saw “boss-servant roles in racial terms” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).

---

3. The Pseudo-Liberal Defense: Using Statistical Differences to Justify Discrimination

• Some philosophers argue that equal opportunity should depend on further investigation into gender differences.
• W.T. Blackstone suggests that gender equality “would be correct only if all relevant facts, characteristics, or circumstances… were independent of gender” (Blackstone, 1975, p. 247, cited in Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).
• J.R. Lucas extends this reasoning by saying that “the more integrally and the more invariably a difference is connected with a person’s sex, the more we are entitled to insist that the mere fact of being male or female can constitute a conclusive reason against being allowed to do something” (Lucas, 1973, p. 167, cited in Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).
• Ketchum and Pierce argue that this logic can be applied to race, justifying discriminatory hiring practices if statistical differences exist between racial groups, leading to racial bias in employment (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 94).

---

4. The Libertarian Defense: Defending Discrimination as a Matter of Choice

• W.E. Cooper defends sexist institutions by appealing to individual freedom, arguing that people should be free to choose traditional gender roles (Cooper, 1975, p. 256, cited in Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 94).
• The authors criticize this argument by showing that the same logic could be used to justify racial oppression, arguing that if Black individuals “choose” lower-status positions, this could be seen as legitimizing racial discrimination (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).
• They note that no one argues for the right of Black people to be treated as slaves, yet Cooper uses similar reasoning to defend sexism (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).

---

5. Critique of These Defenses

• The authors argue that these defenses of sexism fail to recognize how discrimination is institutional and systemic, rather than a matter of personal choice.
• They point out that all three defenses imply that societal change should only happen if sexist or racist attitudes disappear naturally, rather than being challenged through policy and law (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 96).

---

6. Conclusion: Challenging Implicit Bias in Justifications of Inequality

• The authors conclude that justifications for sexism often rely on principles that could be applied to racism, exposing the hidden racial biases in these philosophical defenses (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 96).
• They argue for a more critical approach to discrimination, one that does not rely on cultural traditions, statistical differences, or individual choices as justifications for inequality (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 97).

---

Key Takeaways

• Sexist defenses often rest on arguments that could justify racial discrimination.
• Conservative, pseudo-liberal, and libertarian defenses of sexism reinforce implicit racism.
• Discrimination should be challenged systematically, not passively accepted as tradition or personal preference.

1. Critical Race Theory (CRT)

• Revealing the Overlap Between Sexism and Racism:
  • The article argues that philosophical justifications for sexism often rely on principles that could also justify racism, thus exposing the implicit racism within arguments defending gender inequality.
  • “Several articles which defend sexist practices are implicitly racist… principles that apply to the areas where sexism and racism are similar” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 91).
• Exposing Institutional Racism Through Gender Analysis:
  • The study shows how institutional discrimination is defended using logic that maintains both racial and gender hierarchies.
  • “A racist who thinks of servility and deference as essential characteristics of negritude will have as much difficulty taking orders from a Black boss as will a sexist who thinks of a woman boss as inappropriate” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).

---

2. Feminist Theory

• Intersectionality of Gender and Race:
  • The article precedes and informs later feminist theories of intersectionality, showing how sexist oppression often mirrors racial oppression.
  • “The conservative argument policies directed against racism or sexism can be justified only if the society is not racist or sexist” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).
• Critique of Gender-Based Essentialism:
  • Challenges the pseudo-liberal argument that women’s roles should be determined by biology or statistical differences, a concept later addressed by feminist theorists like Judith Butler.
  • “The more integrally and the more invariably a difference is connected with a person’s sex, the more we are entitled to insist that the mere fact of being male or female can constitute a conclusive reason against being allowed to do something” (Lucas, 1973, cited in Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).

---

3. Postcolonial Theory

• Colonial Logic in Justifications of Oppression:
  • The article highlights how the same arguments used to justify sexism were used historically to uphold colonialism and racial hierarchy.
  • “If a widespread association between the role of priest or the role of soldier and maleness justifies excluding women from professions related to those roles, similar associations would justify excluding Blacks” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 92).
• Cultural Norms as Justifications for Discrimination:
  • The conservative defense of discrimination as “tradition” parallels colonial arguments for maintaining racial hierarchies in occupied territories.
  • “If attitudes and habits of discrimination are sufficiently integral to the culture, discriminatory policies and laws are justified” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 92).

---

4. Social Constructivism

• Critique of Biological Determinism:
  • The authors challenge the idea that social roles are dictated by biological sex or race, instead arguing that they are social constructs reinforced by power structures.
  • “Neither Blackstone nor Lucas explains why he thinks that hiring people on the basis of sex—and, within the favored sex, on qualifications—would be so much easier and more beneficial than hiring on the basis of individual qualifications” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 94).
• Discrimination as a Socially Maintained System:
  • The article supports later social constructivist theories by demonstrating that discrimination persists not due to natural differences but due to constructed social norms.
  • “One person cannot be discriminated against as a woman without there being some practice or policy of discrimination which would affect other women who might not so choose” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).

---

5. Legal and Political Philosophy

• Critique of Libertarian Defenses of Discrimination:
  • The authors challenge libertarian arguments that discrimination should be a matter of free choice, pointing out that discrimination is systemic and affects all individuals within an oppressed group.
  • “Such institutions regulate and affect people other than those who choose them” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).
• Opposing the “Consent” Argument for Inequality:
  • They argue that just because individuals “choose” to accept lower status does not mean the discrimination is justifiable—a key critique of laissez-faire approaches to social justice.
  • “One could produce a racially just society by convincing Blacks that they are better off as slaves, servants, and manual laborers” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).

---

6. Moral and Ethical Philosophy

• Moral Critique of Discrimination Justifications:
  • The article challenges the idea that discrimination is morally acceptable if it is statistically or culturally justified.
  • “Lucas argues for institutionalizing sexist discrimination in such cases on the analogy of the speed limit” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 94).
• Critique of Relativism in Discrimination:
  • The authors expose the danger of moral relativism in justifications of racism and sexism, showing how similar reasoning has historically been used to justify slavery and segregation.
  • “No articles in the literature champion the rights of Blacks to be treated as inferior (or to be slaves if they want to be) in order to safeguard their freedom, and Cooper offers no reason for granting such rights to sexists while not granting them to racists” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 95).

---

7. Influence on Intersectionality Studies

• Early Formulation of Intersectionality Concepts:
  • The article precedes and contributes to Kimberlé Crenshaw’s later work on intersectionality, which examines how multiple forms of discrimination overlap.
  • “Policies directed against racism or sexism can be justified only if the society is not racist or sexist” (Ketchum & Pierce, 1976, p. 93).

---

Conclusion: Broader Impact on Literary and Social Theory

• Implicit Racism bridges multiple literary, social, and philosophical disciplines, offering an early critique of implicit bias, intersectionality, and institutional discrimination.
• The study challenges sexist and racist justifications by exposing their shared logic, laying groundwork for later scholarship in critical race theory, feminist theory, and postcolonial studies.
• It remains an important work in understanding how social injustices are justified through flawed philosophical reasoning, making it a foundational text in intersectional and social justice studies.

---

7. Lack of Cross-Cultural Analysis

• The article focuses on Western philosophical debates without considering how sexism and racism are justified differently across cultures.
• Non-Western perspectives on discrimination may not align with the conservative, pseudo-liberal, and libertarian defenses described in the paper.