As I understand it, feminism cannot be reduced to the fight for equality and parity between men and women. If that were the case, politics of recognition of difference would only be politics of lesser evil. Quotas are imposed because we have to, but it’s a ladder we can get rid of once equality or parity has been achieved. According to some, once these goals have been reached, we reach a level where principles are color blind and recognition of difference is no longer necessary.

Feminism goes further. Stereotypes associated with feminine and masculine genders have been historically established for millennia. For example, emotional restraint, physical strength and virility have been associated with the male stereotype. Emotional expressiveness, resilience and empathy have been associated with the female stereotype. Of course, genders are fluid, and male and female people can in principle more or less exemplify the stereotypes associated with the two genders mentioned. But historically, there have been strong trends, and people of the opposite sex have more often than not exemplified the traits respectively associated with the two traditional genders.

In the political sphere, the people who seemed to demonstrate an aptitude for governing were those who showed a high degree of self-confidence, who knew how to make themselves heard, and who demonstrated a strength capable of exercising leadership. It was less important to elect people who were capable of doubting, listening and working as a team in a transpartisan fashion. As a result, the vast majority of those elected have been men, and professions associated with the male stereotype such as business (entrepreneurs) and the construction industry (where construction goes, the economy goes) have been valued. In some societies, the military has been valorized, whether in terms of compulsory military service or by the presence of a commander-in-chief role. Professions associated with the feminine stereotype, based on care, empathy and compassion (nursemaids, teachers, nurses, on-call instructors) were given less importance.

During the pandemic, we realized the importance of professions associated with care, and how these underpaid jobs were also exercised in difficult conditions. This is where the policy of recognition plays an essential role. It’s not just a question of quotas. Quotas are certainly necessary, but more is needed. We need to make empathy, compassion and care an integral part of our way of thinking in the long term, in our choice of political representatives and in the professions we value.

This is not just a lesser evil, a transitory policy. I don’t believe in humanism without feminism. The politics of recognizing difference, in its substantive aspect (taking into account empathy, compassion and care) is constitutive of a theory of justice and is essential to any enterprise aspiring to the universal.