Here is my outline of Professor Trebilcot's article, "Sex Roles: The Argument from Nature," as found in M. Mahowald's anthology, Philosophy of Woman, (Hackett, 1983), pp. 376-383.The outline is placed here for my students and other colleagues.Comments, additions, and corrections are welcome. Please send them to

Michael KaganLe Moyne College Department of PhilosophySyracuse, NY 13214Email: KAGAN@maple.lemoyne.edu 

I. Trebilcot's thesis

A. "I argue that whether there are natural psychological differences between males and females has little bearing on the issue of whether society should reserve certain roles for females and others for males." [p. 377, top]

B. Concern is with psychological differences

1. notes that those who argue for psychological differences usually do so from biology

a) e.g., differences in brain structure

b) Psychoanalysis--psychological responses to bodily differences

c) the thesis of difference usually allows for overlapping ranges

C. Trebilcot defines a sex role "as a role performed only or primarily by persons of a particular sex." There are 2 questions:

1. are sex roles a good thing?

2. should society enforce sex roles?

D. Trebilcot focus on the second question as the question, "whether society should direct women into certain roles and away from others, and similarly for men."

II. Presentation of and Responses to arguments for enforcing sex roles

A. Inevitability

1. Response: if so no need for such direction and sanctions

B. well-being--people will choose against their own happiness in roles decisions

1. response--given the overlap, there is still a problem of sorrow introduced by mismatches forced by society

C. efficiency--if only women can do x, then we should check out a population of only women

1. [granting the big if] response need to weigh efficiency against other goals, e.g., liberty, justice, equality of opportunity

III. Summary

A. Takes only the argument from efficiency as at all plausible and concludes:

B. "Considering the argument in this way, I conclude that whether there should be sex roles does not depend primarily on whether there are psychological differences between the sexes. The question is, after all, not what women and men naturally are, but what kind of society is morally justifiable. In order to answer this question, we must appeal to the notions of justice, equality, and liberty. It is these moral concepts, not the empirical issue of sex differences. which should have pride of place in the philosophical discussion of sex roles." [p. 383 ft.]