The community must provide all child care, from birth until maturity, so women will be free to pursue vocations and other public matters without comparative disadvantage. If de Beauvoir answers that justice is transcendent, then each society and each individual must be free to invent his or her own conception of justice. Justice would fall within the scope of each person's freedom of ethical creativity. If justice is in the realm of transcendence, then de Beauvoir cannot argue that her conception of justice is right and that those who favor a patriarchal conception of justice are wrong. Alternatively, if de Beauvoir answers that justice is immanent, then once again justice has no authority over us as humans.
Human destiny is one of escape from immanence.
Consequently, in either case, appeals to justice would seem to carry no weight. From de Beauvoir's perspective, it makes no sense to exhort people to pursue justice. Such exhortation is nothing but de Beauvoir's attempt to push her own choices upon us, under the cover of a kind of moral necessity. In other words, de Beauvoir seems to be guilty of trying to entice us to commit an act of bad faith, of accepting as a necessity what is really a matter of personal choice. From a classical, Aristotelian veiwpoint, the virtue of justice is rooted in human nature, as our the virtues associated with marriage, parenthood and the family, such as chastity, parental responsibility and filial loyalty.