Towards a critique of care fetishism: Social reproduction feminism and the ethics of care

Recently, there has been a notable rise in scholarly publications, research projects and public discussions engaging with care ethics and social reproduction feminism. However, despite their shared focus on caring activities, these two feminist traditions diverge significantly in their theoretical foundations and political implications. The primary distinction lies in their conceptualization of care itself: whereas care ethics emphasizes the affective and moral dimensions of caregiving, social reproduction feminism understands care as labour essential to sustaining life and reproducing labour power. In addition, they differ in their interpretations of interdependence – care ethics views it as an inexorable part of the human condition, while social reproduction feminism examines it through the relationship between production and reproduction. This article analyses hitherto under-scrutinized differences between these traditions. More specifically, it brings to the fore misinterpretations of social reproduction feminism by care ethics scholars while addressing underexplored dimensions within social reproduction feminism itself, including the role of affect in care labour, and Marx's concept of social relations of production. Ultimately, the article argues that the ethics of care tends to idealize caring activities as a moral good, detached from social and economic contexts. Using Marx's theory of commodity fetishism, it thus contends that care ethics risks treating care as a fetish, obscuring the systemic inequalities and inherent contradictions embedded in caregiving.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Feminist Theory
Published
2025-09-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/14647001251376299
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Social Policy and Reform Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
25.57
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Towards a critique of care fetishism: Social reproduction feminism and the ethics of care

Sara R. Farris
3 citations
Feminist Theory
Social Policy and Reform Studies
25.57
article

Towards a critique of care fetishism: Social reproduction feminism and the ethics of care

Sara R. Farris
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Recently, there has been a notable rise in scholarly publications, research projects and public discussions engaging with care ethics and social reproduction feminism. However, despite their shared focus on caring activities, these two feminist traditions diverge significantly in their theoretical foundations and political implications. The primary distinction lies in their conceptualization of care itself: whereas care ethics emphasizes the affective and moral dimensions of caregiving, social reproduction feminism understands care as labour essential to sustaining life and reproducing labour power. In addition, they differ in their interpretations of interdependence – care ethics views it as an inexorable part of the human condition, while social reproduction feminism examines it through the relationship between production and reproduction. This article analyses hitherto under-scrutinized differences between these traditions. More specifically, it brings to the fore misinterpretations of social reproduction feminism by care ethics scholars while addressing underexplored dimensions within social reproduction feminism itself, including the role of affect in care labour, and Marx's concept of social relations of production. Ultimately, the article argues that the ethics of care tends to idealize caring activities as a moral good, detached from social and economic contexts. Using Marx's theory of commodity fetishism, it thus contends that care ethics risks treating care as a fetish, obscuring the systemic inequalities and inherent contradictions embedded in caregiving.

Feminist Theory
Goldsmiths University of London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Social Policy and Reform Studies
25.57
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.