Cultural Relativism and the Target Family

Observation socialization and developing agency

This constructed case asks when an observer may criticize a gender-asymmetric family practice without confusing unfamiliarity, inference, and evidence. The case does not describe an identified family or establish facts about Muslim families generally.

Level	Estimated time	Textbook connection
Introductory to intermediate	75 to 95 minutes	Chapter 7 pp. 179 to 190 with an optional Chapter 5 connection on pp. 138 to 146

Critical Moral Reasoning skills used observation and inference, cultural relativism, power, stakeholders, care, reflection, transfer

Connection to the textbook This public module demonstrates one application of the method developed in Critical Moral Reasoning. The textbook provides the fuller explanations of the concepts and ethical frameworks used here.

Inquiry Focus

When may an observer ethically criticize a family practice without treating unfamiliarity as evidence of harm

Learning Objectives

Separate observation, inference, and moral judgment.
Apply the same evidentiary and moral standards to familiar and unfamiliar practices.
Reconstruct a charitable cultural-relativist argument before criticizing it.
Examine how voice, power, consequences of dissent, and developing agency affect the case.
Apply Feminist Ethics of Care without presuming either oppression or free choice.
Reach a conditional conclusion and identify evidence that could change it.

Constructed Case

At a Target store in a U.S. city, you notice a family walking together. A man and a young boy, who appears to be about six, wear T-shirts, jeans, and sneakers. A woman wears a long, loose garment and a head covering. A girl who appears to be about eight wears a long, loose garment and a head covering. The children seem close in age. You do not speak with anyone in the family.

The children’s exact ages, the names of the garments, the family’s reasons, the children’s preferences, and the consequences of refusing are unknown.

Initial Position

Write 100 to 150 words describing your first moral reaction. You may conclude that no judgment is yet justified.
Answer provisionally: When, if ever, is it ethically acceptable for parents to give a young daughter a more restrictive or conspicuous dress expectation than a similarly aged son?
Rate your confidence from 0 to 100 and identify one fact that could change your position.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Exercise 1: Observation Inference and Judgment

Classify each statement as observation, inference, or moral judgment. Then explain what additional evidence would be needed for each inference.

Statement	Classification	Evidence needed
The girl and woman are wearing head coverings
The father requires the girl to wear the garment
The girl freely chose the clothing
Both children should have identical clothing rules
The clothing rule is harmful

Textbook Concept: Cultural Relativism

Chapter 7 distinguishes the fact of cultural variation from the moral claim made by cultural relativism. Different communities may approve different practices. That descriptive fact does not by itself settle whether social approval makes a practice morally right. The chapter also asks whose attitudes define a culture when people within a community disagree or hold unequal power (Holcombe, 2025, pp. 179 to 190).

Who counts as the relevant culture, and whose approval or dissent has moral authority

Exercise 2: Compare Familiar and Unfamiliar Socialization

Case	Constructed scenario
A	The Target Family case
B	Parents buy beauty products for their six-year-old daughter and praise her for looking pretty. They praise her similarly aged brother for being strong.
C	Parents take both six-year-old children to weekly worship and teach them that their faith is true.
D	Parents require their young son, but not their daughter, to wear a conspicuous symbol of family or religious belonging.

What is stipulated or observable in each case, and what remains unknown?
Is the moral concern the visible marker, unequal treatment, the consequence of refusal, or another feature?
Would your judgment change if the children’s sexes were exchanged? Identify the morally relevant reason.
Are you applying the same principle to familiar and unfamiliar practices? If not, state a morally relevant difference.

Exercise 3: Developing Agency

Consider four separate hypothetical variations. Do not project a later statement backward as proof of what the child felt earlier.

At age six, the girl says, I like dressing like my mother.
At age ten, she says, I do not want to wear the head covering today.
At age thirteen, she says, I do not believe I have to wear it.
At age sixteen, she says, I want to stop wearing it.

Age	Child’s interest	Legitimate parental interest	Possible limit on authority	Missing fact
6
10
13
16

Compare three possible parental responses: support the child’s decision; explain the practice, hear the child’s reasons, and allow a decision; or require compliance under threat of lost family privileges. Explain which facts and moral principles make these responses different.

Exercise 4: Reconstruct and Challenge Cultural Relativism

For this exercise only, stipulate that some adults in the family’s community approve of introducing girls to a head covering at a young age, other adults disagree, and the children did not help establish the norm. The family has not stated its reasons.

Write the strongest available defense of the practice as belonging, religious formation, modesty, preparation, or another internally meaningful commitment. Do not invent testimony.
Explain how cultural relativism connects collective approval to moral status in the textbook’s account.
Identify who counts as the relevant community and whether visible approval could reflect unequal power.
Apply two Chapter 7 criticisms, then write the strongest relativist reply.
State a provisional conclusion and one fact that could change it.

Exercise 5: Feminist Ethics of Care

If you have studied Chapter 5 pages 138 to 146, apply the book’s treatment of Feminist Ethics of Care to the age-ten refusal. Care directs attention to concrete relationships, dependency, voice, responsiveness, and unequal power. It does not predetermine the clothing decision (Holcombe, 2025, pp. 138 to 146).

Map the relationships among the child, parents, sibling, extended family, and community. Include only relationships supplied or stipulated by the case.
Identify whose account might be overlooked by an outside observer and whose account might be overlooked within the family.
Explain how teaching a valued practice could express care.
Explain how making disagreement costly could undermine responsiveness or developing agency.
Assess whether an outsider who presumes oppression risks a paternalistic response. Keep that question separate from whether the family rule is justified.

Reasoned Conclusion

Write 400 to 600 words. Separate visible facts from missing facts, identify stakeholders and power, present the strongest argument on two sides, apply cultural relativism and one criticism from Chapter 7, and reach a conditional conclusion. Do not generalize from the constructed case to Muslims or any other group.

Reflection and Transfer

Return to your initial position. State whether your conclusion, confidence, or reasons changed and identify what caused the change.

Transfer Case

A family allows both six-year-old children to choose their hairstyles but requires its son alone to wear a conspicuous family symbol on school days. At thirteen, he says that the symbol marks him as different and asks to stop wearing it. The family has not yet responded.

Apply the same reasoning process without using the earlier organizers. Identify one morally relevant similarity and one morally relevant difference between this case and the Target Family.

References

Holcombe, M. T. (2025). Critical moral reasoning: An applied empirical ethics approach.

Mark T Holcombe