Does Sorority Deserve to Exist? Examining Political Divides in Female Solidarity
The concept of sorority, often understood as mutual solidarity and recognition among women against historical inequalities, is being questioned regarding its reliance on political affinity. Recent discussions, particularly on platforms like TikTok, have raised the uncomfortable question of whether a woman "deserves" sorority based on her political stances, such as holding conservative views. This debate highlights a tension between sorority as an ethical principle versus a political alliance, exemplified by the case of Keiko Fujimori, Peru's first democratically elected female president. While disagreeing with her ideas or voting choices is legitimate within a pluralistic democracy, withdrawing the principle of sorority based on these differences implies that recognition between women is conditional on shared worldviews. Different interpretations of sorority exist: some, like Marcela Lagarde, view it as a political alliance aimed at transforming oppressive relationships, thus naturally having boundaries. Others, influenced by liberal traditions such as Martha Nussbaum and Susan Moller Okin, ground equality in the inherent dignity of women as individuals and citizens, where disagreement justifies debate but not the cancellation of recognition. The issue arises when one perspective asserts exclusive validity. The article suggests distinguishing between political agreement and the fundamental recognition of equal dignity. Denying political alliance is permissible, but denying equal dignity transforms sorority into a filter of belonging, deeming some women more or less deserving of recognition based on ideology. Automatic sisterhood may be an illusion; solidarity should be built, not imposed through exclusion. While political alliances may require coincidence, inherent dignity never should. The author posits that the core discussion should not be about who deserves sorority, but rather which definition of sorority should be defended to uphold the dignity of all women in Peru, irrespective of their political affiliations.
The discourse surrounding sorority, particularly its intersection with political ideology, reveals a fundamental tension between solidarity as a strategic political alliance and recognition as an inherent ethical principle based on equal human dignity. When sorority is framed as a political tool, its application can logically become conditional, subject to shared goals and affiliations, potentially leading to exclusion based on ideological divergence. Conversely, viewing sorority through a lens of inherent dignity suggests a universal recognition of shared humanity, where political disagreement does not negate fundamental respect. The challenge lies in navigating these differing conceptualizations within a pluralistic society, particularly in the context of advancing women's rights and representation. The debate prompts reflection on whether solidarity should be a universally applied ethical standard or a selectively deployed political strategy, and what implications each approach has for fostering genuine equality and inclusive political discourse in the long term.
AI-generated to prompt reflection — not editorial opinion, not advice, not a statement of fact. How this works.