Where are the Women? Stanford Law Review Edition

Stanford Law Review

Volume 64 • Issue 4 • April 2012

Articles
The Tragedy of the Carrots:
Economics and Politics in the Choice of Price Instruments

Brian Galle
64 Stan. L. Rev. 797

“They Saw a Protest”:
Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction

Dan M. Kahan, David A. Hoffman, Donald Braman, Danieli Evans & Jeffrey J. Rachlinski
64 Stan. L. Rev. 851

Constitutional Design in the Ancient World
Adriaan Lanni & Adrian Vermeule
64 Stan. L. Rev. 907

The Copyright-Innovation Tradeoff:
Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Intentional Infliction of Harm

Dotan Oliar
64 Stan. L. Rev. 951

I see two co-authors.

Just sayin’.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Where are the Women? | Comments Off on Where are the Women? Stanford Law Review Edition

Where are the Women? Harvard Symposium Edition

Harvard Law Review

Volume 125 · May 2012 · Number 7

ARTICLE
Regulation for the Sake of Appearance
Adam M. Samaha

SYMPOSIUM
THE NEW PRIVATE LAW
Introduction: Pragmatism and Private Law
John C.P. Goldberg

The Obligatory Structure of Copyright Law: Unbundling the Wrong of Copying
Shyamkrishna Balganesh

Property as the Law of Things
Henry E. Smith

Duties, Liabilities, and Damages
Stephen A. Smith

Palsgraf, Punitive Damages, and Preemption
Benjamin C. Zipursky

I see none.

Just sayin’.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Where are the Women? | Comments Off on Where are the Women? Harvard Symposium Edition

Where are the Women? Illinois Law Review/Jack Balkin Edition

 

University of Illinois Law Review Logo

University of Illinois Law Review, Issue 2012:3

Symposium: Jack Balkin’s Constitutional Text and Principle

The Method of Text and ?: Jack Balkin’s Originalism With No Regrets – Larry Alexander (PDF)

Jack Balkin’s Interaction Theory of “Commerce” – Randy E. Barnett (PDF)

The Balkinization of Originalism – James E. Fleming (PDF)

Constitutional Cultures, Democracy, and Unwritten Principles – Jeffrey Goldsworthy (PDF)

Jack Balkin As the Picasso of Constitutional Theorists – Sanford Levinson (PDF)

The Constitution Can Do No Wrong – Gerard Magliocca (PDF)

The Abstract Meaning Fallacy – John O. McGinnis & Michael B. Rappaport (PDF)

Talk About Talking About Constitutional Law – Adam M. Samaha (PDF)

The Politics of Constitutional Fidelity – Mariah Zeisberg (PDF)

Nine Perspectives on Living Originalism – Jack M. Balkin (PDF)

I see one.

Just sayin’.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Where are the Women? | Comments Off on Where are the Women? Illinois Law Review/Jack Balkin Edition

Feminist Saint Joan

Blawg Review #320 is a salute to Joan of Arc: warrior, saint, and icon. Amicae Curiae editors Melissa Castan and Kate Galloway do the honors.

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal History | Comments Off on Feminist Saint Joan

Tait on “Historical Households, Earned Belonging, and Natural Connections”

Allison Tait (Gender Equity and Policy Postdoctoral Associate 2011-12,
Yale Women Faculty Forum) has posted to SSRN her article “A Tale of Three Families: Historical Households, Earned Belonging, and Natural Connections,” 63 Hastings L. J. 1345  (2012).  Here is the abstract:

Cases targeting family regulation in the 1970s turned, for the first time, on three contrasting and sometimes competing theories of the family – historical households, earned belonging, and natural connections. This Article introduces and defines these three theories and offers a descriptive account of how the theories were used by litigants and the Supreme Court alike to measure discrimination, evaluate the rights of individual family members and, often, increase household equality. The theory of historical households, developed with great success by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, invoked a Blackstonian family defined by gender hierarchy and the law of coverture, and posited that this model was in need of legal reordering. Earned belonging, offered by Ginsburg as a replacement for historical households, presented a new and more democratic family theory centered on ideas of conduct-based outcomes. The earned belonging theory proposed that an individual could earn her full place in the family through positive conduct and performance. The theory of natural connections, on the contrary, promoted received wisdom about family ordering based on biologic “truths” about sex-based differences. Courts operating according to natural connections theory privileged maternal rights, rejected many paternal claims, and affirmed laws promoting the nuclear, or natural, family. The work of this Article is to present a new and synthetic reading of cases about wives, illegitimate children, and unwed fathers that follows these three logics, revealing how they weave together and why earned belonging provides the strongest support for Ginsburg’s original vision of an equalized household.

The full paper is available for download here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families, Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on Tait on “Historical Households, Earned Belonging, and Natural Connections”

Double Nickels on the Dime: Supreme Court of Israel Creates Burden-Shifting Framework for Gender Pay Disparity Cases

According to the Washington Post,

Israeli feminists on Friday welcomed a Supreme Court ruling they say will help enforce equal pay laws for men and women.

The ruling, issued Thursday, requires employers paying different wages to men and women to prove it is not due to gender discrimination. The decision stemmed from a case that began with a woman who was earning 70 percent of the wage of a male colleague at a hardware store chain. Her employer claimed this was because she requested a lower salary when applying….

Dana Naor-Mande’el, legal adviser to the Israeli Women’s Lobby that brought the suit, said the ruling shifts the burden of proof for gender discrimination to the employer.

“An employer cannot hide behind the fact that a woman asked for less money,” she said. “It gives women more leverage.”

This seems like a good idea to me and similar to the framework created by the Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), for challenges to the use of peremptory strikes on prospective jurors in this country. Under the Batson framework, once the defendant makes a prima facie showing of gender or racial discrimination in the use of peremptory challenges (such as by showing the the prosecutor disproportionately struck (fe)male or minority jurors), the burden then shifts to the government to provide gender/race neutral explanations for the use of the strikes. Similarly, under the new Israeli framework, once the plaintiff makes a prima facie case of disproportionate pay, the burden then shifts to the employer to prove gender neutral reasons for the pay disparity.

-Colin Miller

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, Employment Discrimination, Feminism and the Workplace | Comments Off on Double Nickels on the Dime: Supreme Court of Israel Creates Burden-Shifting Framework for Gender Pay Disparity Cases

Manian on “Functional Parenting and Dysfunctional Abortion Policy”

Maya Manian (U San Francisco) has a new article out discussing how to reform laws mandating parental involvement for adolescent girls seeking abortion care: “Functional Parenting and Dysfunctional Abortion Policy: Reforming Parental Involvement Legislation,” 50 Family Court Review 241 (2012).  Here is the abstract:

Abortion-related parental involvement mandates raise important family law issues about the scope of parents’ power over their children’s intimate decisions. While there has been extensive scholarly attention paid to the problems with parental involvement laws, relatively little has been said about strategies for reforming these laws. This article
suggests using insights from family law relating to functional parenthood and third party caregiving as a basis for crafting more capacious methods of ensuring adult guidance for teenage girls facing an unplanned pregnancy. Recent developments in family law bolster the case for reforming parental involvement legislation to allow teenagers to consult with designated adults other than parents or judges. Enlisting other trusted members of the community to assist pregnant teenagers should assuage those who want to guarantee that adolescents consult with an adult in a time of crisis, while also protecting teenagers who reasonably fear discussing pregnancy with their parents.

The full article is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Manian on “Functional Parenting and Dysfunctional Abortion Policy”

Women Occupying Wall Street: Well, a Meet-Up on the West Village

The Women’s Caucus of Occupy Wall Street is hosting its first big gathering tonight in Washington Square Park (in NYC’s Greenwich Village).  Here‘s the announcement:

The First Feminist General Assembly is Thursday, May 17 at 6:30 in Washington Square Park.

Yes, it’s a meeting—but not just any meeting. The invitation list ranges from SisterSong: Women of Color Reproductive Justice Center to the Sex Workers Outreach Project, from the Granny Peace Brigade to Hollaback, a group of 20-somethings using cell phone cameras to broadcast the faces of street harassers. The conversation will be personal as well as political.

It’s as if the Suffragists were getting together with the Sixties reproductive rights activists. And feminist drummers. And men (OWS’s Men’s Circle) doing the childcare.

Gender justice is crucial to economic justice, say the organizers. No society is truly democratic without sexual and gender-identity freedom. The Recession and government cutbacks are hurting women and kids most. And all over the world economic and social progress depend on individuals’ control over their own reproductive lives and on freedom from gendered violence. Feminism opposes domination, by anyone of anyone.

More info here and on Facebook.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Activism | Comments Off on Women Occupying Wall Street: Well, a Meet-Up on the West Village

Deborah Tuerkheimer’s Judging Sex & The En Banc Opinion That Reversed The Rape Shield Killing Ruling

Back in 2010, I posted an entry about the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in Gagne v. Booker, 596 F.3d 335 (6th Cir. 2010), the (in)famous rape shield case in which the dissent accused the majority of “effectively abrogat[ing] every rape-shield statute in this circuit….” At the time, I thought that this statement was a bit hyperbolic but agreed with the dissenting judge that the opinion was a nasty piece of work, so I am glad to report that the Sixth Circuit overturned it in in en banc opinion issued yesterday: Gagne v. Booker. In this post, I will address the court’s holding as well as a terrific forthcoming article, Judging Sex (forthcoming, Cornell Law Review), by Professor Deborah Tuerkheimer.

Continue reading

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Courts and the Judiciary | Comments Off on Deborah Tuerkheimer’s Judging Sex & The En Banc Opinion That Reversed The Rape Shield Killing Ruling

New Issue of Canadian Journal of Women and the Law

From our northern-dwelling colleagues, this notice of that Volume 24, Number 1, 2012 of the Canadian Journal of Women and the Law  is now available online. It’s also available at Project MUSE

Here’s the publisher’s plug for the on-line edition:

CJWL Online includes an archive of current and previously published articles going back to 2009.

Subscribers to CJWL Online enjoy:

Enhanced features not available in the print version- supplementary information, colour photos, videos, audio files, etc. encouraging further exploration and research.

Early access to the latest issues – Did you know that most online issues are available to subscribers up to two weeks in advance of the print version? Sign up for e-mail alerts and you will know as soon as the latest issue is ready for you to read.

Everything you need at your fingertips – search through current and archived issues from the comfort of your office chair not by digging through book shelves or storage boxes. The easy to use search function allows you to organize results by article summaries, abstracts or citations and bookmark, export, or print a specific page, chapter or article.

Founded in 1985, the same year as the equality guarantee of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into force, the Canadian Journal of Women and the Law has been publishing ground-breaking, multi-disciplinary scholarship on the impact of law on women’s social, economic and legal status for twenty-five years.

Project MUSE is a unique collaboration between libraries and publishers, providing 100% full-text, affordable and user-friendly online access to a comprehensive selection of prestigious humanities and social sciences journals. MUSE’s online journal collections support a diverse array of research needs at academic, public, special and school libraries worldwide.

For more information about the Canadian Journal of Women and the Law or for submissions information, please contact:

Canadian Journal of Women and the Law
University of Toronto Press­­ – Journals Division
5201 Dufferin Street, Toronto, ON Canada M3H 5T8
Tel: (416)667-7810  Fax: (416)667-7881
Email journals@utpress.utoronto.ca

Website: www.utpjournals.com

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on New Issue of Canadian Journal of Women and the Law

Inniss on “Bridging the Great Divide”

Lolita Buckner Inniss has published Bridging the Great Divide–A Response to Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel’s Before (and After) Roe v. Wade: New Questions About Backlash, 89 Wash. U. L. Rev. 963 (2012).  Here is the abstract:

This essay discusses the history of Roe v. Wade as recently addressed by Linda Greenhouse and Reva B. Siegel. Going beyond their assertions, I suggest that an additional, more encompassing inquiry focuses on what factors are implicated in the politics of abortion and how these factors relate to larger social, political, and cultural conflicts both before and after Roe. By naming party politics and the Catholic Church, Greenhouse and Siegel posit two crucial elements that shaped the abortion debate. I assert, however, that what is not discussed in their Article is the way numerous other factors have figured into the debate, race and class being two of the most salient. Race, class, and abortion have interacted in complex and numerous ways throughout United States history. While this interaction in some respects can be described via a linear, historical approach, it is not fully explicated by a single dichotomous before/after analysis centered on Roe. Instead, race, class, and abortion are constantly interacting, sometimes co-constructed, constituent parts of a much greater social, cultural, and political conversation in the United States. I suggest that if national party politics and the Catholic Church are important aspects of the development of the United States narrative on abortion, then race and class are telling and even compelling subtexts in that narrative. Giving attention to these subtextual strands may offer valuable additional insights.

The full essay is available here.

Professor Inniss is the Joseph C. Hostetler-Baker and Hostetler Professor of Law at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law.  She will be the Elihu Root Peace Fund Visiting Professor of Women’s Studies at Hamilton College during the 2012-2013 academic year.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Politics, Feminism and Religion, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Inniss on “Bridging the Great Divide”

Will Pennsylvanie Become The Last State To Allow For The Admission Of Rape Trauma Syndrome Evidence?

According to an article on the CBS21 news site, “[t]wo very important bills are sitting in committees right now.” One of those bills is House Bill 1264, which allows for the admission of expert testimony regarding rape trauma syndrome. Yes, that’s right. Pennsylvania courts are the last holdout against the admission of RTS evidence. According to Pennsylvania Coalition against Rape CEO Delila Rumburg, “I think it’s really mind-boggling that the expert witness testimony has not been moving because we are the only state in the nation that doesn’t recognize expert witness testimony.”

Why not? The key(stone) case is Commonwealth v. Gallagher, 547 A.2d 355 (Pa. 1988), which held that RTS evidence is inadmissible because “[d]eterminations of credibility…are exclusively the province of the jury.” So, what was the RTS evidence at issue? According to the court,

The crux of the testimony appears to be that the victim’s failure to identify the appellant two weeks after the rape is unremarkable, as she was in the acute phase of RTS in which a victim has difficulty performing even normal functions, and the in-court identification five years later is particularly credible, as it results from a flashback, with the mind operating like a computer.

The Pennsylvania Supremes held that “[i]t is clear that the only purpose of the expert testimony was to enhance the credibility of the victim.” And for the court, this made the evidence inadmissible because

The question of whether a particular witness is testifying in a truthful manner is one that must be answered in reliance upon inferences drawn from the ordinary experiences of life and common knowledge as to the natural tendencies of human nature, as well as upon observations of the demeanor and character of the witness…. [T]he question of a witness’ credibility has routinely been reserved exclusively for the jury.

But here’s the problem with this quote: A rape is not an ordinary life experience. In fact, it is probably about as far from ordinary as you can get. And that’s exactly the point of RTS evidence. It is to inform jurors, many of whom have not been raped (or have not come to terms with being raped) that they can’t apply inferences from the ordinary experiences of human life and reach an accurate understanding of how rape victims act. All of this is contained in the General Assembly’s findings connect to House Bill 1264 (reprinted below), and we can only hope that the Pennsylvania legislature relies upon these findings rather than “common knowledge as to the natural tendencies of human nature”:

Continue reading

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Courts and the Judiciary | Comments Off on Will Pennsylvanie Become The Last State To Allow For The Admission Of Rape Trauma Syndrome Evidence?

Ashe on “Women’s Wrongs, Religions’ Rights”

Marie Ashe (Suffolk) has posted to SSRN her article Women’s Wrongs, Religions’ Rights: Women, Free Exercise, and Establishment in American Law, 21 Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review 163 (Fall 2011)Here is the abstract:

This article provides an historical examination of American Constitutional law concerning religion as it has evolved through three periods: the Mormon period of the late nineteenth century; the religious pluralism period of post-WW2 decades; and the multiculturalism period that began around 1990 and that remains underway. It examines Supreme Court interpretations of First Amendment provisions pertaining to religion, and it contextualizes those interpretations to explore their implications for women’s liberty and equality at each of the three periods. Its argument is that Constitutional doctrine relating to religion – through its multiple doctrinal reversals – has consistently entailed and depended upon negative constructions of women, sacrificing women’s liberty and equality interests in order to prefer and to cultivate the liberty and equality interests of churches.

The full article is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Religion | Comments Off on Ashe on “Women’s Wrongs, Religions’ Rights”

Corbin on “Expanding the Bob Jones Compromise”

Caroline Mala Corbin (Miami) has posted to SSRN her chapter “Expanding the Bob Jones Compromise,” which will appear in the forthcoming Cambridge U Press book edited by Austin Sarat, Matters of Faith: Religious Experiences and Legal Responses in the United States.  Here is the abstract:

Sometimes the right to liberty and the right to equality point in the same direction. Sometimes the two rights conflict.  Which constitutional value should prevail when the right to religious liberty clashes with the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of race and sex? More particularly, should faith-based organizations, in the name of religious liberty, be immune from anti-discrimination law?

Bob Jones University v. United States suggests a compromise: permit faith-based organizations to discriminate on the basis of race or sex if that discrimination is religiously required, but at the same time refuse to condone or support that discrimination by denying those religious organizations any financial aid.  In fact, it is already federal policy to withhold government subsidies from religious organizations that discriminate on the basis of race, and the Bob Jones Court rejected a free exercise challenge to that policy.  The same policy should apply with regard to discrimination on the basis of sex. Allowing religious groups to discriminate on the basis of sex but declining to provide grants, vouchers, or tax exempt status to those that do discriminate honors both our commitment to religious liberty and our commitment to equality.

The full chapter is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Religion | Comments Off on Corbin on “Expanding the Bob Jones Compromise”

What If Dometic Violence Victims “Stand Their Ground” in Florida?

 How is this case different from all other Stand Your Ground cases?

Marissa Alexander, a mother of two, was denied a new trial after she was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for shooting “in the direction of” her husband.  Here’s Wonkette’s take:

[A] Florida judge has decided that there will be no new trial for this nice mother of two, Marissa Alexander, who will serve her 20 years in jail for shooting in the direction of her abusive husband, which she did because she couldn’t get to her cell phone or escape because she had run away from him into the garage only to discover that the garage door was broken.

Well lady, Florida would like to remind you that you could have escaped your attacker “through the front or back door,” and also? Going back in the house armed with a gun (where she presumably would have had to go in order to escape through the front or back door, but whatever, we didn’t expect this to make any sense and so far we’re not disappointed) is not “consistent with someone in genuine fear of his or her life.” * * *

It took a jury 12 minutes to find Alexander guilty of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; the judge in that trial did not allow her to cite her husband’s longstanding abuse of her and others, or the state’s Stand Your Ground defense. This is going to shock you, and we know it sounds weird especially since it’s Florida and all, but it’s possible that race was a factor in this decision.

See the full article here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Courts and the Judiciary | Comments Off on What If Dometic Violence Victims “Stand Their Ground” in Florida?

It’s My Space, That’s Why They Call It MySpace: Court of Appeals of Texas Finds MySpace Comment Covered by Rape Shield Rule

A defendant is charged with various sexual crimes against the alleged victim, a 15 year-old. To support his defense, the defendant seeks to introduce into evidence a comment that the alleged victim made on her MySpace page, where she referred to herself as a “bitch/whore.” Should the court admit or exclude this evidence? That was the question confronted by the Court of Appeals of Texas, Waco, in its recent opinion in Dale v. State, 2012 WL 1382446 (Tex.App.-Waco 2012).

Continue reading

Share
Posted in Acts of Violence, Coerced Sex, Courts and the Judiciary | 1 Comment

Menstruating in Public

Sarah Maple in her Studio; Photo by Andrew Hassen

Folks with an interest in feminist art will want to check out the work of Sarah Maple, a visual artist based in Sussex, England.  In a recent article in the (UK) Independent, journalist Charlotte Rachael Proudman describes the artist’s work:

In an unfailingly mischievous manner, Sarah Maple uses narrative artwork to challenge traditional notions of religion, identity and the societal role of women. Her artwork never fails to shock; her latest piece Menstruate With Pride(right) is no exception. Surrounded by a horrified and disgusted crowd, Maple stands centre stage, a proud woman menstruating in public. It’s an interesting and bold statement; clearly Maple is an incendiary feminist. But the painting also airs a deep societal secret that menstruation is – and must remain – taboo.

What better way to understand the meaning behind Maple’s artwork than to ask the artist herself? “Initially I didn’t want to make work about menstruation because I thought it was a bit of a cliché. But as I was looking more into the idea of women and shame, I felt like I couldn’t avoid it!” Maple laughs. “I think there’s a phenomenal burden of shame on women from word go. When I started my period I was absolutely horrified, I felt it was humiliating. I didn’t tell my mother for 3 years, I felt I was letting her down. I think this may have been a cultural thing,” she says.

Read the full article here.

For more about Sarah Maple’s work, see her website here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Arts | Comments Off on Menstruating in Public

Will the South Africa Constitution Remove Sexual Orientation Equality??

It seems unthinkable.

The South Africa Constitution has the reputation as the most progressive constitution in the world, based in part on an equality provision that explicitly includes “sexual orientation.”

But there is a move afoot to amend the Constitution and remove “sexual orientation” from the text.

More on ConLawProf blog here. 

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on Will the South Africa Constitution Remove Sexual Orientation Equality??

NYPD Pursues Father-Son Sex Trafficking Ring + Its Johns

Last week, the Manhattan DA’s office unveiled charges against a father and son accused of running a sex trafficking ring.  Six livery cab drivers were indicted for their roles in the operation as promoters of prostitution.  Both the two pimps and the livery cab drivers have pled not guilty (details here and here).  These men are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Wonder who patronizes prostitutes?  In New York City, the group includes NYC finance and real estate professionals, a doctor, a restauranteur, a musician and recent college graduates.  A spokesperson for the DA’s office says that 22 “johns” have been charged in the case.  Two have already pled guilty.

According to the press release from the Manhattan DAs office, the father-son pimps “doled out only a few dollars a night to buy food and other necessities” to the women working for them.  The men “employed other forms of psychological manipulation and domination in an effort to maintain their control over the prostituted victims. For example, they branded victims with tattoos depicting their street names, and at least one of the women was tattooed with a bar code as well.”  Read the full press release here.

Here’s some recent news coverage:

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Human Trafficking, Prostitution | Comments Off on NYPD Pursues Father-Son Sex Trafficking Ring + Its Johns

What’s the Difference Between a “Gender Quota” and “Gender Balance”?

Avivah Wittenberg-Cox, writing for the Harvard Business Review Blog Network, describes it this way:

Most companies looking to balance genders in their workforces set a target for the number of women in the organization. Royal Dutch Shell, for example, has committed to having at least 20% women in top management in the long term.

Aside from the low number and all the arguments around merit, this approach is problematic for two reasons.

First of all, it completely ignores the huge variations in gender representation across the different functions of the organization. Companies proudly tout women’s successes in areas such as HR or communications, where women can sometimes account for 85% of positions, while keeping quiet about the fact that there are only 10-15% women employees in operations. They then average that 80% to argue that they may overall be balanced. Problem solved.

Well, no actually. Having too many women in PR is surely as bad as too few in manufacturing.

The second problem is that quotas are very excluding of men, who usually don’t react very positively to years of having to push the percentage of women.

Which is why I welcome the recent announcement by the medical equipment company Medtronic that instead of targeting a proportion of women in the workforce it is targeting a balance. Their target is not a set number. It is a range. Anything between 40/60 and 60/40 of either gender is acceptable. Anything outside of that range is not considered balanced.

Read the full post here.

There are several scholars, most notably Kim Krawiec (Duke), doing important work on gender and corporate boards (see, e.g., here and here).  But to be honest, I still don’t get it.  What exactly is the difference between labeling something a “quota” and setting a “floor” below which the work force is not considered “balanced”?  Is “balance” acceptable because it is gender-neutral?  And is there a constitutional difference between a policy that is gender-aware and gender-neutral?  Is gender balance a neutral goal?  I’d better go read up on my ConLaw.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Employment Discrimination, The Overrepresentation of Women, The Underrepresentation of Women | 2 Comments

Wicked Little Town: Transgendered Widow of Firefighter Fights the City of Wharton, Texas for Workers Compensation Benefits

When the Landmark Theater in Chicago announced that John Cameron Mitchell‘s “Hedwig and the Angry Inch” would soon be playing as part of its Midnight Madness, I was not surprised at all. “Hedwig” is this generation’s “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” and my favorite movie musical of all time. as Wikipedia describes it,

Hansel Schmidt (John Cameron Mitchell) is a philosophical East German “slip of a girly boy” who loves rock music, and is stuck in East Berlin until he meets Luther Robinson (Maurice Dean Wint), an American soldier. Luther falls in love with Hansel and the two decide to marry. This plan will allow Hansel to leave communist East Germany for the capitalist West. However, in order to be married, the couple must consist of a man and a woman. Hansel’s mother, Hedwig (Alberta Watson), gives her child her name and passport and finds a doctor to perform a sex change. The operation is botched, however, leaving Hansel – now Hedwig – with a dysfunctional one-inch mound of flesh between her legs, the eponymous “Angry Inch”.

Hedwig eventually moves with Robinson to Junction City, Kansas, but Robinson leaves Hedwig for a man. Hedwig then forms a band with Korean-Born Army wives and pens her first song, “Wicked Little Town.”

According to Hedwig, “This is the first song I’ve ever written. And it’s written for a guy to sing.” The song is all about two individuals overcoming the forces of nature and a town that’s “pious, hateful, and devout” to come together and find love. The most famous lyric from the song, “if you’ve got no other choice, you know you can follow my voice,” also served as the inspiration for the 2006 documentary, “Follow My Voice: With the Music of Hedwig,” a neat little documentary about the creation of Hedwig tribute album, with proceeds to benefit the Hetrick-Martin Institute.

The song also has a title befitting the wicked little town of Wharton, Texas. As reported by ABC News, in 1996, Nikki Araguz legally changed her name to Justin Graham Purdue in 1996, married volunteer firefighter Thomas Araguz in 2008, and had sexual reassignment surgery later that year. In 2010, Araguz was killed while fighting a fire. Then,

After losing her appeal to workers’ compensation benefits last month in the state’s administrative process, Araguz filed a suit last week against Wharton, about 60 miles outside Houston with a population of over 9,000 people.

A judge voided Araguz’s marriage last year and denied her death benefits because the state of Texas does not recognize same-sex marriages. She filed an appeal last month.

“As difficult as this has been for me in my grief, I cannot in good conscience allow someone else to go through this again,” Araguz said….

Her attorney, Peggy Campbell of Peggy M Campbell Esq. PC in Houston, said Araguz’ recent suit against the city for workers’ benefits is not about gay marriage.

“All of the courts keep saying they don’t allow gay marriage,” Campbell said. “Our position is that this is not a gay marriage issue. It’s a man being married to a woman.”

So, will the wicked little town of Wharton, Texas win, or will Araguz be triumphant in her appeal? Only time will tell.

-Colin Miller

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, LGBT Rights | 1 Comment

Angela Davis on Abortion Rights in Context

In February, Angela Davis spoke at the University of Kansas to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the protest by the campus group February Sisters that advocated for no-cost daycare, a women’s health and other facilities for women.  (For more on that history, see here.)

Ms. Davis recalled that in 1971, she was in jail in Marin County, California, when she was asked to write a statement in support of a reproductive rights rally in San Francisco:

I was asked to write a statement that very specifically engaged with the issue of abortion rights.  Of course, I was in favor of women’s abortion rights, but I did not want to take women’s abortion rights out of the context of the broader conglomeration of issues that constitute women’s reproductive rights.

At that time, we had learned that vast numbers of Native American women had been sterilized.  We’d also learned about the extent to which Puerto Rican women were used as guinea pigs by pharmaceutical companies in the production of what was then the new birth control pill. So, I wrote a statement in which I tried to make connections between women’s reproductive rights and women’s right to be free from forced sterilization. The statement wasn’t read.

My position was, I cannot talk about abortion rights in isolation from these other issues.  I’ve come to understand that when we talk about feminist epistemologies, we speak precisely about the ability to think, together, about things that often do not cohabit the same analytical space.

For more coverage, see the People’s World article, here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Race and Racism, Reproductive Rights | Comments Off on Angela Davis on Abortion Rights in Context

No Passage To India: India Fails To Approve Landmark Changes To Its Sexual Harassment Law

Landmark amendments to India’s sexual harassment law failed to get approval by the Union Cabinet on Thursday. The amendments would have done at least two things to India’s Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill:

(1) bring domestic help and workers under the ambit of protection of the Bill; and

(2) place the burden of proving innocence on employers.

These amendments were “based on the recommendations given by a parliamentary standing committee,” and it appears that the second amendment was the one that created the controversy. According to an article on the amendments, “A senior minister, speaking on condition of anonymity, said ‘some more discussion is needed on the bill. You cannot have it completely one-sided.'” I wonder, though, whether the amendment does indeed firmly place the burden of proof on employers or whether it is more in the vein of the McConnell-Douglas burden shifting framework that exists in the United States.

In any event, the proposed amendments will now be sent to a Group of Ministers headed Home Minister P Chidambaram. It will be interested to see what emerges in terms of sexual harassment law in the world’s second most populated country.

-Colin Miller

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Workplace | Comments Off on No Passage To India: India Fails To Approve Landmark Changes To Its Sexual Harassment Law

Yuvraj Joshi, “Respectable Queerness”

London-based writer Yuvraj Joshi has published Respectable Queerness, 43 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 415 (2012).  Here is the abstract:

This Article proposes a new theoretical framework to understand public recognition of gay people and relationships. This framework — called “respectable queerness” — suggests that public recognition of gay people and relationships is contingent upon their acquiring a respectable social identity that is actually constituted by public performances of respectability and by privately queer practices. The challenges posed by such recognition include dissonance between one’s public and private selves and fueling moralism and entrenching divisions between different queer constituencies.

The full article is available here.  The article builds on an earlier piece in the (UK) Guardian (here).

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in LGBT Rights | Comments Off on Yuvraj Joshi, “Respectable Queerness”

FLP Interview with Jen Mullins

I recently met Jennifer Mullins, a Legal Rhetoric faculty member at American University Washington College of Law, where she is one of two 2011–2012 Graduate Teaching Fellows. Professor Mullins graduated cum laude from the Washington College of Law in 2011. As a student, she served as the Editor-in-Chief of the American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law. She completed her undergraduate degree at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with honors and distinction in 2006, where she studied biology and international studies. (Source here.)

I asked Jen to do an interview here at the blog about her recent and current scholarship:

Q: At the “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power” Symposium two weeks ago, you presented about some of the reactions to your study of student note publications [The Persistent Gender Disparity in Student Note Publication, 23 Yale J.L. & Feminism 385 (2011)].  Can you give a quick overview of both the study and the reactions?

 JM: The study revealed that between 1999 and 2009, women persistently published fewer student notes in the law reviews of the top 50 law schools.  At 13 schools, women wrote less than 35% of the published notes.  Reactions to the data reaffirm our initial conclusion that there is a lack of institutional knowledge within law review administration.  But, the reactions also suggested that there has been a lack of interest or – even worse – a state of denial about this and other gender disparity issues.  These attitudes may explain why the disparity has been so persistent.

Q: Why is gender parity in law review notes an important issue?

 JM: When we surveyed authors that are now attorneys, they uniformly told us that publication as a student was a significant factor that employers considered when making hiring decisions.  If women are less likely to have a “publications” line on their resume, they are also less likely to receive competitive jobs like clerkships, associate positions, and academic fellowships.

Q: Women have been saying for years that it’s “only a matter of time” until women assume proportional leadership in the legal profession, politics, corporate America.  Yet parity remains elusive.  Why is that?

 JM: I think the reactions to our research tell part of the story.  There is no uniform commitment to understanding gender disparity within the legal community.  Indeed, some people are hostile towards the idea that such a disparity even exists.  Overcoming and eliminating disparity (be it gender, race, etc.) will require a united effort throughout the legal community.  However, it does appear that there is a new found interest in these issues.

Q: What are you working on now?

JM: I am writing a piece for the Pipeline to Power Symposium Issue about the reactions to our research.  I have also been thinking about Judge Gertner’s fantastic speech at the symposium and might start working on a piece on Title VII.

Q: If you had to recommend three books for every incoming law student to read, what would they be?

JM: Getting to Maybe, Becoming Gentlemen, and Legally Blonde (Amanda Brown actually attended Stanford Law School and based the story on her own experience).

Thanks, Jen!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminist Law Prof Profile | Comments Off on FLP Interview with Jen Mullins

Women at Yale Law Still Not Quite as Vocal

As here at Pace we prepare for tomorrow’s Faculty Teaching Day, when, under Bridget Crawford’s able leadership, we will explore issues such as enhancing and assessing active learning in the large law school classroom,  this newsflash caught my eye:

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/04/24/yale-law-study-finds-gender-imbalance-in-student-participation/

The actual study can be found on the Yale Law website at http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Student_Organizations/YLW_SpeakUpStudy.pdf

The WSJ report includes some additional numbers that may be quite familiar to most who frequent this blog but which, I confess, can still set me back:

“Last fall, LexisNexis reported that while women make up 45% of law firm associates, they account for only 6% of equity partners in the AmLaw200. Women make up less than one-third of American lawyers, despite accounting for almost half of law school graduates for the last two decades, according to the American Bar Association’s 2011 Commission on Women in the Profession report.”

Talk about a leaky pipeline . . . and I guess this disparity can’t be ascribed solely to Yale, eh?  I am just so tired of seeing such numbers . . .

At Pace I may be a bit insulated from the persistent reality.  Our student body has long been well above 50% female, even flirting with 60%; the faculty is roughly 40% women and we’ve had nearly half as many women deans as men.  (These are numbers that compare favorably with Yale’s, I cannot resist adding.)   At one time we had a rather cool Webpage celebrating the particular woman-friendliness of our law school, but I see that it’s gone now.  I suppose someone decided that it was no longer necessary . . . after all, we have arrived, haven’t we?

The Yale study is  chock-full of fascinating tidbits of data, well worth a few minutes of your time.  I’d like to see a similar study at Pace, and at many other law schools.  It is always good to know where you really are.

—  Vanessa Merton

 

 

Share
Posted in Feminists in Academia, Law Schools | Comments Off on Women at Yale Law Still Not Quite as Vocal

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Gender

Tracy A. Thomas, University of Akron School of Law, has published Elizabeth Cady Stanton and the Notion of a Legal Class of Gender, in Feminist Legal History: Essays on Women and Law (T. Thomas and T. Boisseau, eds.; NYU Press). Here is … Continue reading

Share
More Galleries | Comments Off on Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Gender

“How Can There Be Too Much Focus on Poverty and Injustice?”

A reader of the NY Times sent in this letter to the paper after reading about the Vatican’s condemnation (see here) of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, the largest organization of U.S. nuns:

I am a lifelong Catholic, 80-plus years, and will die a Catholic. But I will not be silent in my support of the tireless work and dedication of the wonderful nuns who serve the poor and the helpless, the sick and infirm, the children and elderly, who even go to jail for the cause of protesting the evil of war and nuclear threats to humanity and the world.

I will speak out loudly in protest at the Vatican document’s citing of nuns for, as your article says, focusing “too much on poverty and economic injustice, while keeping ‘silent’ on abortion and same-sex marriage.”

How can there ever be too much focus on poverty and economic injustice? And how can the Vatican justly rebuke women busy selflessly carrying out Christ’s work caring for the least of our brethren for being silent on abortion and homosexuality, while for decades bishops were silent about grave sins against the innocent in their care?

The full letter from Ms. Patricia Burns is available here.

It is baffling that the Vatican would condemn women religious for public statements “disagree with or challenge the bishops, who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.” (Source here.)  The bishops were responsible for the systematic cover-up of sexual abuse of children.  “Authentic teachers of faith and morals”  No, human beings who are interested in maintaining power and control, and the Vatican is now reprimanding an organized group of women who have the courage to question those human beings.  These women are working squarely within their faith — as insiders, deeply committed to work on behalf of the most disadvantaged members of society.  Lay Catholic support will rally behind the nuns, IMHO.

Advantage, Sisters.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Religion | Comments Off on “How Can There Be Too Much Focus on Poverty and Injustice?”

“From Multiculturalism to Technique Feminism, Culture, and the Conflict of Laws Style” By Karen Knop, Ralf Michaels & Annelise Riles, 64 Stan. L. Rev. 589 (2012)

The abstract:

“The German Chancellor, the French President, and the British Prime Minister have each grabbed world headlines with pronouncements that their states’ policies of multiculturalism have failed. As so often, domestic debates about multiculturalism, as well as foreign policy debates about human rights in nonWestern countries, revolve around the treatment of women. Yet feminists are no longer even certain how to frame, let alone resolve, the issues raised by veiling, polygamy, and other cultural practices oppressive to women by Western standards. Feminism has become perplexed by the very concept of “culture.” This impasse is detrimental both to women’s equality and to concerns for cultural autonomy.

“We propose shifting gears. Our approach draws on what, at first glance, would seem to be an unpromising legal paradigm for feminism—the highly technical field of conflict of laws (conflicts). Using the nonintuitive hypothetical of a dispute in California between a Japanese father and daughter over a transfer of shares, we demonstrate the contribution that conflicts can make. Whereas Western feminists are often criticized for dwelling on “exotic” cultural practices to the neglect of other important issues affecting the lives of women in those communities or states, our choice of this hypothetical not only joins the correctives, but also shows how economic issues, in fact, take us back to the same impasse. Even mundane issues of corporate law prove to be dizzyingly indeterminate and complex in their feminist and cultural dimensions.

“What makes conflict of laws a better way to recognize and do justice to the different dimensions of our hypothetical, surprisingly, is viewing conflicts as technique. More generally, conflicts can offer a new approach to the feminism/culture debate—if we treat its technicalities not as mere means to an end but as an intellectual style. Trading the big picture typical of public law for the specificity and constraint of technical form provides a promising style of capturing, revealing, and ultimately taking a stand on the complexities confronting feminists as multiculturalism is challenged here and abroad.”

Available here: http://www.stanfordlawreview.org/sites/default/files/Knop-64-Stan-L-Rev-589.pdf

–Ann Bartow

 

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on “From Multiculturalism to Technique Feminism, Culture, and the Conflict of Laws Style” By Karen Knop, Ralf Michaels & Annelise Riles, 64 Stan. L. Rev. 589 (2012)

“A Civil Remedy” by Kate Nace Day

Suffolk University Law Professor Kate Nace Day‘s documentary film A Civil Remedy will be shown on Saturday, April 26, 2012 at the Brattle Theater in Harvard Square.  If you’re in the Boston area or planning to be there, the screening will be followed by a panel discussion.  Here are the details:

A Civil Remedy (2012). Directed by Kate Nace Day (20 min + Q&A Panel)

A CIVIL REMEDY is a short documentary film that tells the story of one sex trafficking victim who survived – an American girl who was trafficked into prostitution in Boston at the age of seventeen, escaped to her family, and survived to finish school and become an anti-trafficking advocate.

Against this backdrop, the film weaves the perspectives of three commentators. Gloria Steinem has led the American women’s rights movement for four decades. Alicia Foley is the Founder of The Boston Initiative to Advance Human Rights. Siddharth Kara, Fellow on Human Trafficking at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, is best known for his economic analysis of sex trafficking in SEX TRAFFICKING: INSIDE THE BUSINESS OF MODERN SLAVERY.

A CIVIL REMEDY explores the importance of survivors’ stories, the meaning of justice, and the need to place new legal tools in the hands of victims. A civil remedy – a state civil action for money damages – will empower victims to reclaim their equal place in their community, see their violators held accountable, and drain resources from the global sex industry.

A panel of conversation and commentary with photojournalists and documentary filmmakers who are developing sex trafficking stories will follow the screening.

More info about the screening is available here.

Professor Day is the founder of Film and Law Productions.  Here’s a description of that project:

Film and Law Productions has it roots inside the law school classroom in pedagogical experiments with storytelling, film and filmmaking….Law’s stories take the form of dialogue, a highly structured, almost architectural exchange of questions and answers that translates the messy details of human stories—bodies and emotions, social contexts, and moral doubts—into apparently neutral and universal stories of written texts, precedent, and authority. Law’s stories say simply, “this is what law is.”

Film and Law Productions presents other stories – stories as vibrant retellings of law that render visible what law does. These stories bring us back from the abstract to the real, from the general to the personal and particular.”

Source here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Activism, Feminism and Law, Feminism and the Arts, Sex Trafficking | Comments Off on “A Civil Remedy” by Kate Nace Day

Cary Franklin, “Inventing the ‘Traditional Concept’ of Sex Discrimination”

Cary Franklin (Texas) has posted to SSRN her article, Inventing the “Traditional Concept” of Sex Discrimination,125 Harv. L. Rev. 1307 (2012).  Here is the abstract:

It is a commonplace in employment discrimination law that Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination has no legislative history. Courts have therefore argued that this prohibition must be restricted to the “traditional concept” of sex discrimination. Traditionally, courts suggest, discrimination “because of sex” referred only to practices that divided men and women into two perfectly sex-differentiated groups. Although Title VII doctrine has evolved over time, this “traditional concept” of sex discrimination continues to exert a powerful regulative influence over the law. It excludes certain claims — such as those by sexual minorities — from coverage and elevates the evidentiary burdens plaintiffs must satisfy in order to prove discrimination “because of sex.”

This article argues that the “traditional concept” of sex discrimination is an invented tradition. It purports to reflect the historical record, but in fact reflects normative judgments about how deeply the law should intervene in the sex-based regulation of the workplace. Recovering the largely forgotten legislative history of Title VII’s sex provision, this article shows that there was little consensus and much debate in the 1960s about what qualified as sex discrimination. Employers advanced the argument that Title VII applied only to practices that sorted men and women into two perfectly sex-differentiated groups in order to preserve the traditional gendered organization of the workplace and insulate particular employment practices from scrutiny. In the 1970s, courts adopted this interpretation but no longer cited the need to preserve conventional sex and family roles as a justification; instead, courts cited deference to the legislature and fidelity to tradition as justifications for interpreting the law narrowly. This article shows that history does not compel courts to interpret Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination in anticlassificationist terms — and that, in fact, in cases where anticlassificationism produces expansive rather than narrow results, courts have routinely departed from it. This tendency should prompt us to think critically about the assertion that deference to the legislature and fidelity to tradition require courts to adhere to a narrow conception of what it means to discriminate “because of sex.” The parameters of Title VII’s prohibition of sex discrimination have always been determined by normative judgments about how forcefully the law should intervene in practices that reflect and reinforce conventional understandings of sex and family roles.

The full piece is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Employment Discrimination, Feminism and the Workplace | Comments Off on Cary Franklin, “Inventing the ‘Traditional Concept’ of Sex Discrimination”

CFP: “Institutional Responsibility for Sex and Gender Exploitation”

From the FLP mailbox:

Call for Papers Announcement

AALS Section on Women in Legal Education

“Institutional Responsibility for Sex and Gender Exploitation”

 2013 AALS Annual Meeting

January 4-7, 2013

New Orleans, Louisiana

The AALS Section on Women in Legal Education will hold a program during the AALS 2013 Annual Meeting in New Orleans, with paper presentations on the topic of Institutional Responsibility for Sex and Gender Exploitation.  We have the below committed moderator and speakers, and are seeking paper submissions to fill the fifth speaker slot.  The papers will be published as a Symposium in the Iowa Journal of Gender, Race & Justice.

Moderator: Professor Cheryl Wade

Protection for Children in Club Sports (Professor Ellen Bublick)

Theories to Holding Insurance Companies Liable for Third Party Exploitation (Dean Jay Mootz)

Employer Liability for Family Responsibilities Discrimination    (Professor Joan Williams)

Finding Institutional Tort Responsibility for Sex and Gender Exploitation        (Professor Deleso A. Alford)

Submissions should be of scholarship relating to the topic of Institutional Responsibility for Sex and Gender Exploitation, but they can be on any dimension or strand of the general topic.  There is a maximum 25,000 word limit (inclusive of footnotes) for the submission. People submitting papers for consideration must be willing to have the paper published as part of the symposium, if the author is selected as the fifth speaker for the panel. Each professor may submit only one paper for consideration.

Papers will be reviewed anonymously. The manuscript should be accompanied by a cover letter with the author’s name and contact information. The manuscript itself, including title page and footnotes, must not contain any references that identify the author or the author’s school. The submitting author is responsible for taking any steps necessary to redact self-identifying text or footnotes.

To be considered, papers must be submitted electronically to Professor Kirsten Davis, Stetson University College  of Law, kkdavis@law.stetson.edu.  The deadline for submission is Wednesday, August 1, 2012. The author of the selected paper will be notified by October 1, 2012.  The Call for Paper participant will be responsible for paying his or her own annual meeting registration fee and travel expenses.

Full-time faculty members of AALS member law schools are eligible to submit papers. Foreign, visiting (and not full-time on a different faculty), and adjunct faculty members, graduate students, and fellows are not eligible to submit.

Papers will be selected after review by an ad hoc committee composed of Section Executive Committee members.

Any inquiries about the Call for Papers should be submitted to:  Professor Kirsten Davis, Stetson University College of Law, kkdavis@law.stetson.edu , or 727-562-7877.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation | 1 Comment

CFP: “Feminists Interrogate States of Emergency”

From the FLP mailbox, this CFP:

Feminists Interrogate States of Emergency

Call for Papers for a Special Issue of FeministFormations, 2013, 25(2)

This special issue will take up the concept of “states of emergency” as an object of feminist analysis.  We seek essays that will interrogate the ways in which a “state of emergency,” whether it be about economic scarcity, morality under siege, sexual violence or national security, is politically constructed and (re)produced through myriad technologies of power.  How do political actors define a moment as a state of emergency in order to mobilize publics, re-define citizenship, or deploy political machinery?  At the same time, we invite scholarship that names states of emergency made invisible by existing public discourse. In addition to essays that analyze the role and power of difference in framing narratives of emergency, we invite papers that question what can “count” as a state of emergency.  For example, how can the racialized, sexualized and gendered exigencies of the everyday be seen as constitutive of affected “states”? How are so-called “natural disasters” of environmental calamity or contamination dependent on variable distinctions between “natural” and “unnatural”?

We seek papers that interrogate “states of emergency” in relation to gender, sexuality and race on topics such as war, institutions, law, literature, popular culture, “natural disasters,” state and intimate violence, citizenship, immigration, environment, population, health, and economic instabilities.  We welcome contributions with U.S., global and transnational foci.

The special issue will focus on the following themes and questions but is not restricted to them:

*  How are “states of emergency” produced, claimed and deployed?  What are the institutional (e.g., government, media, religion) and/or informal (e.g., local networks) mechanisms that create /construct or facilitate a “state of emergency”?

*  How and why are certain events framed as “natural disasters”?  Why are certain experiences with environmental disasters represented as “natural” and what division between “nature” and “human” is required?  How do the global and transnational operate within these constructs of “natural” and in locating disaster?

*  What does it mean to approach disaster relief from an intersectional perspective?  What lessons have we learned frompost-disaster relief efforts in the United States, such as after Hurricane Katrina and 9/11?  How do such efforts operate at an international level, as with the UN in the post-Rwandan genocide projects?

*  How are discourses about environmental states of emergency (such as with populations, environmental contamination and global warming) deployed and informed by understandings of gender, race and sexuality and other naturalized categorizes such as “health” and “safety”?

*  How have the issues of immigration and economic recession been crafted as “states of emergency” in the United States and/or in other countries?  What political projects have they served?  What counts as a “state of emergency?”

*  How does the state produce narratives about states of emergency—stranger abduction, morality under siege, economic scarcity or debt, sexual violence—in ways that are shaped by gendered, sexualized and racialized discourse?

*  How do feminist understandings of affective “states” alter the framework of “states of emergency”?  What cultural or emotional terrains do we traverse when we include such understandings of “states of emergency?”

*  How do representations—fiction, memoir, film, art, television, online sites—address states of emergency? How can representations reinforce or resist dominant narratives about women/subjects in crisis?

Manuscripts will be subject to blind review and must adhere to the publishing guidelines of the Feminist Formations journal, found here.

Please contact any one of the co-editors with questions:

Jill Bystydzienski, The Ohio State University bystydzienski.1@osu.edu<mailto:bystydzienski.1@osu.edu>

Jennifer Suchland, The Ohio State University suchland.15@osu.edu<mailto:suchland.15@osu.edu>

Rebecca Wanzo, Washington University in St. Louis rwanzo@wustl.edu<mailto:rwanzo@wustl.edu>

Submission Process:  Fullpapers should be sent to Jill Bystydzienski by August 1, 2012.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation | Comments Off on CFP: “Feminists Interrogate States of Emergency”

What is in a Name?

Via Tech Crunch (here), this chart:

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Culture, Feminism and Technology | Comments Off on What is in a Name?

Alicia Kelly, “Navigating Gender in Modern Intimate Partnership Law”

Alicia Kelly (Widener) has posted to SSRN her article Navigating Gender in Modern Intimate Partnership Law, 14 J. of Law & Family Studies (forthcoming 2012). Here is the abstract.

With women edging up to become half the workforce, claims of women’s economic empowerment now abound. But the reality is that gender equality has not been mainstreamed. The truly eye-opening new data is how marginalized and partial many women’s attachment to the labor force continues to be. Simultaneously, another misleading narrative also circulates — that of separateness — of disconnected individualism. In the context of intimate partnership and feminist legal theory, this Article pushes back against these accounts and demonstrates their problematic link. Contrary to the storylines, many women’s lives in fact remain characterized by deep bonds with partners, children, and extended family, and these connections tend to make women less economically powerful. This vulnerability is recurrently developed inside couple relationships, particularly because labor division still often translates into women specializing in unpaid work.

In this Article I explore how a feminist family law should respond to the connections and risks that come with intimate partnering. I contend that existing intimate partner economics law misses opportunities for strengthening bonds and unfairly distributes the risks and rewards of partnering by turning asymmetry into gendered inequality. This stems from law’s false assumptions that partners are situated equally and are largely unconnected. In contrast, expanding the lens from my earlier work on partnership marriage, I propose that for both unmarried and married couples, law should be based on economic sharing behavior and the benefits and burdens it recurrently produces. As one example of its application, I overview how the theory translates into law when couples break up. This serves to define, modernize and advance the partnership ideal that has so far only been partially developed and implemented in law. I situate my proposal and argue for its appeal in what I identify as related pluralist feminist and family law agendas. This framework is important for sex equality. By recognizing and valuing care work within the family economy, it mitigates the economic risks of sharing that tend to be more acute for women. Yet it resists assignment of the care-giving role to women by recognizing sharing whatever the pattern, thus supporting a range of choices. The sharing model serves equality in another critical way as well, as its principles apply across different forms of couple relationships, whether married or cohabiting, same sex or opposite sex.

The full piece is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families, Feminist Legal Scholarship | Comments Off on Alicia Kelly, “Navigating Gender in Modern Intimate Partnership Law”

Marc Spindelman, “Gay Men and Sex Equality”

Marc Spindelman (Ohio State) has published Gay Men and Sex Equality, 46 Tulsa L. Rev. 123 (2010).  Here is an excerpt from the introduction:

As easy as it may be to apprehend why straight men have not endorsed sex equality theory and joined its fight in any substantial numbers, a question about gay men remains. Are they just like their straight brothers in relation to sex equality theory and its cause? Or are there yet particular dynamics and ways in which gay men relate to sex equality theory and its struggle?

From within sex equality theory itself, on a rough, initial cut, male homosexuality, if taken to indicate sexual disinterest in, hence sexual non-involvement with, women, might appear to be tidily unimplicated in the heterosexually-based production of gender and sex inequality. If only reality were that crisp. Many gay men, despite their sexual orientation, hence their preferences for sex with other men, do have sex, including unequal sex, with women, just like (and sometimes as) heterosexual men. Gay men who do not engage in these sexual activities, like those gay men for whom sexuality with women is a practice of equality, may not themselves directly contribute sexually to the inequalities between the sexes. But that, of course, does not, without more, mean there may not be–and are not–other ways in which gay men do their part to contribute to them. * *  *From aught that appears, this is a world dominated, hence conditioned, by an active awareness of truths that sex equality theory keeps: Inequalities in sex produces gender, men and women, as those relations shape the organization of society in prison, itself scarcely unrelated to the remainder of social life. The gender and resulting sex-inequalities produced by forced sex in all-male prisons comes not through the sexual objectification and use of biological females, but biological men, proving another of sex equality theory’s facts: that it means what it says when it says it is not a biological theory of sex. Through bodies regarded and used as things for sex by other men, gay men individually and many more gay men collectively, along with differently sexually-oriented men and trans-folk of different genders,  have had to live the knowledge, the truth, that sex equality theory holds: that the system of sex inequality sexuality builds can be affirmatively and very concretely bad news for both women and men, including those men who self-identify or are identified by others as gay. * *  *

Far from passively contemplating injustices like these, sex equality theory, following its commitment to ending all sex-based inequalities, has tangibly helped to chip away at homophobia’s social, including legal, hegemony, proving through its successes to be a substantial boon for those who do or would engage in same-sex sex. Some years back, sex equality theory’s insights about homophobia’s crucial role in furthering women’s inequality, aided by keeping male sexuality locked into channels of cross-sex sex, were translated and taken up in the language of law. Laws and legal practices that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, including against gay men, were recognized as implicating legally-established, including constitutionally-based, sex equality norms.  Those norms suggest that anti-gay laws and practices, lacking any secular, rational basis, much less any more powerful non-religious form of justification, should be eliminated from the waters of the law. Despite the radical possibilities of the idea, it wasn’t entirely shunned by often-conservative legal actors, especially courts. Almost remarkably, the sex equality arguments for gay rights, as they have come to be known, made their most famous and indelible legal mark around the law governing one of society’s most treasured institutions: heterosexual marriage.

(Citations omitted). The full article is available here.

To my mind, Marc Spindelman is among the small handful of legal scholars working in feminist legal theory at the highest and most sophisticated levels, so I read pretty much anything he writes!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, LGBT Rights, The Overrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on Marc Spindelman, “Gay Men and Sex Equality”

Where are the Women? University of Toronto L.J. Edition (Again and Again)

This academic year, the University of Toronto Law Journal has managed to publish 3 issues having only one female author each.  From the TOC to Volume 62:1 (2012) (posted here):

Pandectism and the Gaian classification of things
Francesco Giglio

From author’s right to property right
Simon Stern

Redressing the right wrong: The argument from corrective justice
Douglas Sanderson

Review Article
Contextual constitutionalism after the UK Human Rights Act 1998
Evan Fox-Decent

Book Reviews

Fictions of Justice: The International Criminal Court and the Challenge of Legal Pluralism in Sub-Saharan Africa by Kamari Maxine Clarke and Culture under Cross-Examination: International Justice and the Special Court for Sierra Leone by Tim Kelsall
Erica Bussey

A Perilous Imbalance: The Globalization of Canadian Law and Governance by Stephen Clarkson and Stepan Wood
Derek McKee

And don’t get any hopes up for the next issue, either.  From the  TOC to Volume 62:2 (2012) (posted here):

The Sword in the Zone: Fantasies of Land-Use Planning Law

Ed Morgan

Recent Developments in WTO Jurisprudence: Has the Appellate Body Resolved the Issue of an Appropriate Standard of Review in SPS Cases?
Tracey Epps

Corrective Justice and Unjust Enrichment
Matthew Doyle

The Logic of Planning and the Aim of the Law
N E Simmonds

Why Compare? Comments on Kevin Jon Heller and Markus D Dubber’s The Handbook of Comparative Criminal Law
Leo Zaibert

We’ve already blogged about Vol 61: Issue 3 (here), which published only one female author.

Two of the 9 articles in Volume 61: Issue 4, a “Special Issue” on Constitutionalism and the Criminal Law, were by women (see here).

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Where are the Women? | 2 Comments

Yxta Maya Murray, “Feminist Engagement and the Museum”

Yxta Maya Murray (Loyola-LA) has posted to SSRN her article Feminist Engagement and the Museum, 1 Br. J. Am. Leg. Studies (2012).   Here is the abstract:

One day in the summer of 2011, Los Angeles law professor Yxta Maya Murray visited the Tate Britain and was shocked to see there Cathy Wilkes’ installation (We are) pro-choice, a phantasmagoria involving a “weeping” naked mannequin sitting on a toilet, as well as a ladder and some banged up kitchenware. Murray gleaned that something feminist was in the offing, but couldn’t tell quite what that might be. It seemed evident that Wilkes was making a case that women are miserable in today’s brutalist western-capitalist society. However (she wondered), were there any other, more hopeful, conclusions to draw from the work? Pro-choice sent her off on a six-months long adventure of trying to understand this amazing art – intellectual travels that drew her to the lands of French/Bulgarian feminist Julia Kristeva, U.S. legal theorist Drucilla Cornell, and to the strange ways of Irish Wilkes herself. In the resulting essay, Murray asks the following questions: What is this suffering that Wilkes’ describes in (We are) pro-choice? How does art help us understand subordination that might be reversed through legal reform? And what kinds of radical changes have to be made to museum law and policy that would allow art institutions to help us liberate the oppressed?

The complete article is available here.

-Bridget Crawford

image(c) 2008. Cathy Wilkes, (We Are) Pro Choice.

Share
Posted in Feminism and the Arts | Comments Off on Yxta Maya Murray, “Feminist Engagement and the Museum”

Symposium Round-Up: “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

Here’s a round-up of my posts relating to the “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power” Symposium held at Michigan State University College of Law.  The posts are spread among the Legal Ethics Forum, The Faculty Lounge and this blog.

Three Student Reactions to “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

“The Pipeline to Power For Women Lawyers in Michigan”

Paula Monopoli on “Gender Equality and Legal Academia”

Involving Men in the Conversation

Gender Equality: From the Boardroom to the Electorate

Nancy Gertner Just Rocked My World

Judge Nancy Gertner on “How the Courts Have Repealed the Civil Rights Act”

Gender, Race and the Judiciary @MSU Law Symposium

“Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power” Symposium Under Way at MSU

Deborah Rhode on “Women and the Path to Leadership”

Linda Greenhouse on “Is the Pipeline Half Full or Half Empty?”

Pre-Symposium Thoughts on “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

Serving as the Symposium’s “live blogger” was a first for me, and I’ll be attempting to collect my thoughts about both the program and blogging’s relationship to academic conferences in a forthcoming essay in the Michigan State Law Review.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Academia, Law Schools, Law Teaching, Legal Profession | Comments Off on Symposium Round-Up: “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

Three Student Reactions to “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

As I left yesterday’s conference, I saw three law review students relaxing in the lobby.  I asked them for a few reactions that I could post on the blog.  They were willing to speak as long as I did not use their names.  I did not record the conversation, but I did take a few notes.

Student X protested that I didn’t want hear comments, indicating that they were not positive.  When I pressed, Student X said, “I was offended by the whole thing.  I don’t want power.”  That student felt that the conference was mostly about complaining about how men have ruined women’s lives.

Student Y said that although there was “nothing new” that the student learned at the conference, “having this dialogue is good, not harmful.”

Student Z said that the student would have liked to see more recognition of inherent differences between men and women.  In response to the presentation by Erika Falk (Communications, Johns Hopkins) regarding coverage of female candidates for President, Student Z said that people do care about women’s emotions; there is nothing wrong with the media covering a female candidate’s emotional responses; the media are not out to get women.  Student Z enjoyed the last panel of the day, “The Pipeline to Power for Women Lawyers in Michigan” and hearing about the different women’s careers.

These comments may take me a while to digest, but I do have a few quick reactions.  The first is, “Was I at the same Symposium that these students were?”

My thoughts then moved to Student X’s disavowal of power (“I don’t want power”).  On the one hand, I can understand if Student X meant to express a lack of interest in becoming a partner in a law firm, president of a bar association, etc.  But at the core of a lawyer’s professional role is power, isn’t it?  To be a lawyer is to have access to power — the power of the law to protect rights and interests.  And even if Student X weren’t thinking in those terms, I had the impression that “power” was a sort of “dirty word.”  If Student X wants to carve out a legal career that allows for equal amounts of time devoted to family and work (something Student X identified to me as desirable), then isn’t that a desire for a certain kind of power, too — a power over one’s own career?

For Student Y to say there was “nothing new” at the Symposium is both understandable (yes, the history of discrimination is a long and familiar story to some) and puzzling.  Was there really nothing new to be learned?  I felt like my brain was popping with new information and ideas the entire day.  Perhaps Student Y felt like I was giving a “quiz” when I asked the students if they felt they had learned anything new.  Perhaps Student Y did not want to say that there was anything new, for fear it would seem that Student Y was not knowledgeable.  Or perhaps Student Y was bored and resentful of being required to attend the program.  I don’t know.

I am curious about Student Z’s comment that the voting public cares about whether a female presidential candidate has emotional reactions to particular stimuli.  Student Z’s comments reflected a “so what” approach — so what if the media focuses on Hillary Clinton’s tears, but not Barack Obama’s? (My words, not the student’s.)  My brain immediately goes to, “Well, that’s not fair to treat male and female candidates differently.”  Someone taking Student Z’s perspective (but not necessarily Student Z, whom I did not engage further on the topic) might say, “But men and women are different, so it’s okay for the media to treat them differently.”  I suppose that is where I would disagree — at least in my world view, neither biological nor socially-constructed differences between men and women have any bearing on either gender’s fitness for presidential office. But, I’m open to hearing more.

I thank these students for talking to me.  Any other student reactions to the program?

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Legal Profession | Comments Off on Three Student Reactions to “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power”

District Of Oregon Dismisses Stereotype of the Emotional, Gossipy, and Flirtatious Woman & Then Labels the Plaintiff One

As noted by Bridget, in delivering the luncheon address at the MSU Symposium on “Gender and the Legal Profession,” the Honorable Nancy Gertner said that “[t]he reason that people are losing discrimination cases is not because it didn’t happen.  It’s because the law is inadequate to the task.” As exhibit 1 of such inadequacy, I present to you the recent opinion of the United States District Court for the District of Oregon in Arjangrad v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 2012 WL 1189750 (D.Or. 2012). While I will go into the details of Arjangrad in more detail in this post, here’s the gist: Arjangrad claimed that Chase discriminated against her because her manager saw her as inter alia, emotional, gossipy, and flirtatious. The court’s response to the plaintiff? (1) Being emotional, gossipy, and flirtatious are not commonly accepted female stereotypes, and (2) In any event, you are an emotional, gossipy, flirt.

Continue reading

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, Employment Discrimination | Comments Off on District Of Oregon Dismisses Stereotype of the Emotional, Gossipy, and Flirtatious Woman & Then Labels the Plaintiff One

Involving Men in the Conversation

At the MSU Law Symposium on “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power,” more than one speaker has commented on how “great” it is to see so many men in the audience.  I’m eyeballing the room, and I’d say that there are about 100 people in attendance at the conference.  Excepting the speakers, the audience is comprised mostly of law review students, approximately half of whom are male and all of whom are required to be here.

Involving men in conversations about gender issues is necessary.  Undoubtedly some of the male (and female) students in attendance have genuine interest in gender issues.  And of those who don’t have an interest in gender issues, I am confident that some of the male (and female) students in attendance are enjoying the symposium.  But I’m not sure what we can take, derive, assume, infer from the number of men in the room, especially when so many are not here by choice.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Legal Profession | Comments Off on Involving Men in the Conversation

Nancy Gertner Just Rocked My World

“The reason that people are losing discrimination cases is not because it didn’t happen.  It’s because the law is inadequate to the task.”

This is great inspiration to all who toil in the trenches of plaintiffs’ litigation, law review articles and legal reform!

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Employment Discrimination | Comments Off on Nancy Gertner Just Rocked My World

Judge Nancy Gertner on “How the Courts Have Repealed the Civil Rights Act”

The Honorable Nancy Gertner (U.S. District Court of Massachusetts, retired) is delivering the luncheon address at the MSU Symposium on “Gender and the Legal Profession.”

Here are a few of her highlights from her talk:

Judge Gertner explains that the “leaky pipeline” is a product of four factors.

First, there is an ideology about discrimination that treats discrimination an aberration from a perfect market.  In fact, discrimination has been driven underground, made opaque, more complex.

Second, there is a perception that women “have all they need.” There is a perception that women who drop out of the legal profession do so by “choice.”  The “choice” to stay home is influenced by a cultural ideology that motherhood is women’s highest and best vocation, according to Judge Gertner.

Third, women’s expectations have changed on account of the first two factors.  Women coming out of law school today consider a firm with 15% female partners to be “family-friendly.”

Fourth, discrimination law is not remotely adequate to the task of combating bias.  The courts have de facto reversed Title VII.

Judge Gertner says that discrimination cases are now dominated by “losers’ rules,” which she critiques.  Here are the trends she notices (drawing in part of Liz Schneider’s work).

  • “Mere stray remarks” – courts are rejecting evidence of explicit bias, such as ageist or sexist comments.  Judge Gertner says this is used as a rule to exclude evidence as irrelevant, when in fact that is inappropriate when discrimination is plain on its face.
  • “Honest belief” – employers defend selves against summary judgment based on “honest belief” that particular record was poor.
  • “Single decision-maker” – if the employer hired you, then he cannot be discriminatory in firing you.
  • “Slicing and dicing” – describing discrimination in terms of puzzle pieces, not a complex scenario.  Judge Gertner site to Seventh Circuit case in which woman lost case alleging employment discrimination when men made harassing comments to her.  Because some of the incidents occurred outside the statute of limitations, you don’t see the pattern.

Judge Gertner explains that she nevertheless remains an optimist about law’s ability to affect social change.

What to do? Here’s Judge Gertner’s advice.

  • Study these problems.
  • Try new ideas (such as new theories of discrimination against family caregivers).
  • Speak the truth.  Of course the values of decision-makers impact the outcomes they reach.  It’s obvious that Title VII isn’t working.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, Employment Discrimination, Feminism and Law, The Underrepresentation of Women | Comments Off on Judge Nancy Gertner on “How the Courts Have Repealed the Civil Rights Act”

Gender, Race and the Judiciary @MSU Law Symposium

The first panel at the MSU Symposium on “Gender and the Legal Profession’s Pipeline to Power” is organized around the theme of “Gender, Race and the Judiciary.”

Hannah Brenner (MSU) and Renee Knake (MSU) are presenting their work on gender bias in media coverage of the nominations to the United States Supreme Court.   Their reseach suggests, among other things, that physical appearance and family life (i.e., parental status) were more likely to be mentioned in coverage of female nominees than male nominees.  Professors Brenner and Knake employ content analysis in their work.  This is a methodology that is textually-based (i.e., looks at newspaper articles) but is both both qualitative and quantitative.  It’s a methodology that other law professors might fruitfully employ.  I was struck by Professor Knake’s concluding observations that explicit bias in the legal profession has been replaced by a more subtle bias in discussions of motherhood, competence and bias.

Keith Bybee (Syracuse) asks “What Do We Talk About When We Talk Abut Gender Imbalance on the Bench?”  We need to have an accurate count of men and women and also understand how the structure of debates about gender balance itself might function as an impediment to making a positive case for the need for more women on the bench.  What is that structure?  Professor Bybee’s focus is on the “twin tropes” of judges as impartial arbiters vs. judges as politically-motivated policymakers.  He says that one common understanding of impartiality is as something divorced from individual experience. Professor Bybee suggests that pressure should be placed on the gatekeepers of judicial nominees to ask them why they think that women should not be appointed in greater numbers.

Sally Kenney (Newcomb College, Tulane) is sharing her work on “Gender at Work: The First Women on State Supreme Courts.”  Professor Kenney is attempting to uncover the histories of Florence Allen (Ohio Supreme Court, 1922) and Rosalie Wall (Minnesota Supreme Court 1977), Rose Bird (California 1974 [?]).  Study gender as a social process not sex as a variable.  Women’s cases differ considerably from each other.  We need to take an intersectional approach to approach in which gender is not an all-or-nothing lens for understanding the experience of women on state courts.  Gender progress is, unfortunately, reversible.  The substantial presence of women in law schools is not translating into female judges.

Angela Onwuachi-Willig (Iowa) and Amber Fricke (Iowa, JD expected 2012) are presenting their work on “The Inexorable Zero:” Female Judges of Color.”  They explain the need for more women of color on the bench .  Only 8.67% of all active (non-senior status) federal judges are women of color.  They explain that the presence of women of color in the judiciary can have a salutary effect on other judges, is consistent to a commitment to democratic participation of all citizens, and instills trust in the court system.  Professor Onwuachi-Willig and Ms. Fricke’s work pays careful attention to the words of judges — both women of color themselves and those who appreciate the experience that men and women of color bring to the judiciary.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Courts and the Judiciary, Race and Racism | Comments Off on Gender, Race and the Judiciary @MSU Law Symposium

Why NZ Director’s Reference to the “Oprahfication” of the Courtroom was Really a Jab at the “Pussification” of the Courtroom

I’m not a huge fan of victim impact statements. These statements typically used to consist of family members taking the witness stand during the sentencing phase of a murder trial and explaining the character of the victim and what his or her loss meant to the family and the community. Now these statements more typically involve DVDs with montages of photographs showing the victim from birth until just before death, evocative music in the background from artists as varied as Enya and the Beatles, and voiceover narration from a family member. There are of course several problems with such statements, not the least of which is that they can tend to enforce the notion that some lives are more equal than others. A rich victim from a supportive family will likely have several witnesses willing and able to take the witness stand and describe how much the victim meant to them, creating a good likelihood of a lengthier sentence (or death) for the defendant. Meanwhile, the homeless victim without much of a support system likely won’t have (m)any people willing or able to take the stand and vouch for his or her character, likely resulting in a lighter sentence.

Conversely, I love the idea of restorative justice.

Restorative justice is an umbrella term for various voluntary, nonadversarial processes that try to bring together offenders, crime victims, and others to repair the material and intangible harms caused by crime. For example, victim-offender mediation induces offenders to speak with their victims face-to-faceabout their crimes. Family group conferences use trained facilitators to encourage discussions among the families of offenders and victims. Circle sentencing encourages offenders, victims, their friends and families, members of the community, and criminal justice professionals to discuss and agree upon a sentence. Community reparative boards are panels of citizens that discuss crimes with offenders and work out restitution plans. Stephanos Bibas, Transparency and Participation in Criminal Procedure, 81 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 911, 917 n.12 (2006).

Therefore, in theory, I should like the argument made by Kim Workman, the Director of Rethinking Crime and Punishment in New Zealand. So, what’s the problem?

Share
Posted in Feminism and Law, Sexism in the Media | 1 Comment

In honor of Adrienne Rich

Adrienne Rich’s work meant so much to so many of us.  Although I really enjoyed some of her poetry, for me her Compulsory Heterosexuality piece grabbed me from the first read and kept my attention for years.   In 1995 I published my first article, “Queer Intersectionality and the Failure of Lesbian and Gay ‘Victories.’” It fused queer theory into Rich’s lesbian continuum to articulate what the “queer continuum” meant.  It included everyone from the queerest to the J. Edgar Hoovers of the world.   Into this analysis, I brought in Crenshaw’s intersectionality framework.  Intersectionality’s core utility as a theory is descriptive, while Rich’s continuum has real political heft.    The vast range of queer people, most of whom wouldn’t consider self identifying as such, opens up a world of potential resistance to compulsory heterosexuality.  For me, thinking of Rich’s idea in the early 1990s, when I was in ACT UP and Queer Nation, proved transformative.  Rich’s theory helped me overcome the bitterness of an isolated radicalism to move toward acceptance and celebration of every form of resistance.

I’m not alone in this experience.  I feel Rich’s theory has a capaciousness that has inspired so many within feminism.  Feminism after Rich is much more productive.  It doesn’t just analyze how patriarchy controls us but imagines a world in which we can upend it.  When we think of the feminisms that have followed, so much seems to build on Rich.  Third wave feminism’s legitimacy depends on Rich’s broad notion of resistance (yes, you can resist compulsory heterosexuality in fishnets).  Even more recent work, such as Martha Fineman’s great work on vulnerability, seems to draw on Rich’s open-eyed and open-ended vision of how to realize a world of greater equality.

Let’s take the moment of Rich’s passing as an opportunity to honor her – any others who have been touched and pushed by Rich’s work?

Share
Posted in Academia | Comments Off on In honor of Adrienne Rich

CFP: Hypatia Issue on Feminist Disability Studies

From the FLP mailbox, this CFP:

Special Issue on New Conversations in Feminist Disability Studies
August 15, 2013 submission deadline

Hypatia: Journal of Feminist Philosophy is seeking new work for a special issue on disability with the general theme of New Conversations in Feminist Disability Studies. In 2001 Hypatia published its first special issue on feminist philosophy and disability. Since that time, there has been a great deal of disability scholarship in feminist and queer theory. A new special issue provides the opportunity to consider interventions, innovations, and transformations in feminist theory occasioned by theories and concepts that animate feminist disability studies, disability studies, queer disability studies/crip theory.

Within philosophy, much of the discussion of disability has occurred in the areas of bioethics, ethics of care, and social and political philosophy. This work remains crucial for furthering philosophical understanding of disability. In addition to these areas of philosophy, this special issue seeks to provide a space for new feminist
philosophical analyses of disability, as well as new feminist, queer, and feminist queer crip conversations between scholarship on disability in ethics and social and political philosophy and scholarship on disability in epistemology, science studies, environmental philosophy, ecofeminism, queer ecology, aesthetics, critical race theory, metaphysics, phenomenology, and queer theory. Papers on any topic pertaining to feminist or feminist queer crip analyses of disability are welcome, including (but not limited to) the following:

  • -Disability and Phenomenology
  • -Disability and epistemologies of ignorance
  • -Disability, gender, race, class, and sexuality
  • -Disability, national identity, and nationalism
  • -Disability and/as “assemblage”
  • -Disability and the question of “the animal”
  • -Disability and posthumanism
  • -Disability, ethics, and politics
  • -Disability and globalization
  • -Access, accommodation, quality of life
  • -Bodies and borders
  • -Able-bodiedness and able-mindedness
  • -Disability and environmentalism, ecology, ecofeminism, and/or queer ecology
  • -Disability, feminist materialism, and “agential realism”
  • -The relationship between impairment and disability identity
  • -Illness, disease, impairment, bodily limitation, pain, failure
  • -Disability and the meaning and/or experience of sex and gender, transgender, and intersex
  • -Disability and orientation/ reorientation/ disorientation of understandings of time and space
  • -Disability, feminist materialism, and “agential realism”
  • -Disability and critical analyses of science, scientific knowledge, nature, and human nature
  • -Feminist/queer/crip perspectives on the Occupy Movement and other global movements for economic, environmental, social, and political justice
  • -The meaning of art and aesthetic concepts through the lens of disability
  • -Rethinking the canon of western philosophy through the lens of feminist disability studies

Deadline for submission: August 15, 2013.

Papers should be no more than 8000 words, inclusive of notes and bibliography, prepared for anonymous review, and accompanied by an abstract of no more than 200 words. For details please see Hypatia’s submission guidelines here.

Please submit your paper to manuscript central (Wiley-Blackwell) website here.

When you submit, make sure to select “Disability” as your manuscript type, and also send an email to the guest editor, Kim Q. Hall: hallki@appstate.edu, indicating the title of the paper you have submitted.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Call for Papers or Participation | Comments Off on CFP: Hypatia Issue on Feminist Disability Studies

Expectant Mothers Who Hope for Boys, Not Girls

From the 5 Cities, 6 Women blog (here):

[T]here’s a trend I’ve noticed lately that gets me as teary …. It’s this: when pregnant women – smart, funny, fierce women I respect – say they don’t want daughters. Some even take to their Facebook pages to rejoice, at approximately 20 weeks, when they find out it’s a boy instead of a girl – or, in the case of one person I know, updates her status to complain specifically about the disappointment of having a girl.

I find these women fall into two camps:

#1: “I don’t want a daughter because girls are harder to raise than boys.  Variations on this: “Girls are so moody and dramatic” or “Girls are manipulative and dangerous” or “Girls are easy when they’re young but watch out when they’re teenagers! Hoo boy!” or the ironic “Girls are too girly. I just can’t get into that stuff.” I cannot explain these women. I’m sorry. The best I can figure is that they dislike themselves, their sister, their mother, or someone else with a vagina, based on past experience, and the thought of producing another creature of the female variety makes their brain short and they say stupid things like, “Girls are just, I don’t know, harder on you emotionally.”  * * * Really, you should pity these women. Show them kindness. Love them. But do not try to change them; you will not be able to reason with them. * * *

#2: “I don’t want a girl because the world is harder for girls.” * * * When women say this, it usually comes from a place of personal experience, and their hope is to avoid being part of a process that inflicts more pain on another human being – that is, giving birth to a girl. I can understand that.

But it’s still problematic. Because when women pull out this old chestnut, they are not only saying that if they could, they would choose not to increase the female population, but that they would rather participate in the status quo because it’s simpler. Let me rephrase: they would rather have a boy because they are complicit in the fact that being a male in our society is easier than being a woman – and, by having a boy, they have no intention of changing this. By having a boy, they can breathe easier.

The full post (here) is well worth reading.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Feminism and Families | 1 Comment

Poor, Silenced Social Males

I received in my in-box an email from the “Editors” (no names provided) of a new on-line magazine, highlighting the March edition with a tie-in to Women’s History month.  The email began, “MUSED Magazine, the newest digital destination for lifestyle, entertainment and culture for the social male, is committed to advocating for equal rights for women and men” (emphasis added).  That sounded great.  So I went to the Mused website and read several articles of interest.  But then I clicked on the website’s “About” description:

MUSED Magazine is the newest digital destination for lifestyle, entertainment and culture for the social male. For so long, we have silenced the male voice inside and outside of our communities. MUSED serves as a collective of issues we all care about.

MUSED features commentary, opinions and features that raise awareness of the social male and his life experiences.  As the only weekly online magazine for black men in the sector, MUSED releases new issues every Tuesday. The online magazine concept promotes the immersing content experience magazines are known for, and allows new interactive features to stimulate reader engagement, all in a digital format. With a popular blog which is updated daily with the latest news,  we continue to establish ourselves as a reliable source meeting the needs for our readers.

Nothing about a commitment to women’s rights or gender equality.  How come?  Maybe that was the hook to get me to visit the site or blog about it.  Fair enough.  (It worked!) But would an explicit commitment to equality make the magazine less appealing to the “social male”?  And what is a “social male,” anyway? He who is the opposite of anti-social? He who is socially conscious?  And what about the claim that the male voice really been “silenced…inside and outside of our communities”?  The male voice talking about gender equality may be silenced, but MUSED perpetuates, rather than than breaks, that silence.

-Bridget Crawford

Share
Posted in Masculinity | Comments Off on Poor, Silenced Social Males