Sarah Miller

It is fairly easy to charge intergenerational justice accounts that recommend a distribution of healthcare resources favoring the young as being ageist. Clearly, such policies strongly privilege the interests of one age group over those of another. In a time of tight resources, the elderly are to get the short end of the stick, though for reasons that some theorists believe are ethically justifiable. What is not as immediately clear, however, is the sexist nature of rationing healthcare resources for the elderly. In this essay, I contend that perspectives capitalizing on justice, fairness, or equity between age groups do not readily reveal, and perhaps even obstruct, a clear view of such sexist dimensions.

Rather than focusing on the legal and political questions that surround genocidal rape, in this paper I treat a vital area of inquiry that has received much less attention: the moral significance of genocidal rape. My aim is to augment existing moral accounts of rape in order to address the specific contexts of genocidal rape. I move beyond understanding rape primarily as a violation of an individual's interests or agential abilities. The account I offer builds on these approaches (as well as on a pluralist approach), by arguing that rape, as a moral injury, negatively affects the very human dignity of victims. My account also emphasizes the relational harm that marks genocidal rape.