Equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome

We all know what we mean by “equality” – that people are treated as equal to each other because at a fundamental level they have equal value as human beings. But equal treatment shouldn’t be confused with identical treatment. Although all people have equal value, they have different skills and talents. They thrive in different conditions, see the world in different ways, and make different contributions.

The difference between individuals means that perfect equality of outcome is impossible. Furthermore, even if it were possible, it would stifle personal characteristics, resulting in widespread unhappiness. But by the same measure, perfect equality of opportunity is also impossible. No opportunity can be wide enough not to prioritise one quality above another.

The balance between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome is a difficult one. Those on the left have tended to support outcome, bringing in rules and legislation to boost under-representation from a particular section of society. Those on the right have tended to support equality of opportunity, seeking to abolish discriminatory laws and to make new legislation blind to gender, class or race.

On the whole, my belief in individualism leads me towards equality of opportunity. Equality of outcome is philosophically flawed because it promotes a false essentialism and pragmatically flawed because tokenism creates a backlash. I believe that change should primarily come not from heavy-handed legislation (although sometimes this does have a place) but from shifting attitudes and cultures. I support equality of opportunity because I believe the fight for equality is more a social battle than a political battle.

However, equality of opportunity is only meaningful if people recognise that the opportunities really are open to all. The role of the state is to provide equality of opportunity, but the role of society is to encourage people to take up the opportunities.

Advertisements

About feminismfortories

Moderate Tory, Liberal Feminist. Based in the UK.
This entry was posted in Definitions, Media, society and state, Representation, Women in Parliament and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome

  1. Pingback: MPs | Feminism For Tories

  2. Web says:

    Equality of Outcome and Equality of opportunity each have their own distinct functions. For instance, when it comes to civil rights, career opportunities, welfare, and other social issues, Equality of opportunity should take precedence. When it comes to equality of outcome, it should only be enforced in areas in which equal representation is paramount.

    For instance, many feminists will claim “as long as a small percentage of fortune 500 CEOs are women, there is discrimination against women.” But then you have to ask: How many women actually WANT to be fortune 500 CEOs? If only a few dozen want to push for that kind of status, only a few dozen should have it. However, if you try to make it 50-50, you’re taking about 250 potential male CEOs off that list, even though they are qualified, and you’re finding 250 women to replace them, even though there are only a dozen that actually WANT their lives to revolve around their jobs.

    We shouldn’t focus on balance of genders in each field, we should focus on equal opportunity so that things are not harder for those who deviate from the norm.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s