Twitter RoundUp

recite-22358--209425183-aeagd6

After Mandela

‏@RobsonConLaw Daily Quote: Obama on Mandela and “Formal Equality” http://bit.ly/J1ixHK 

‏@gilliancalder tweeted this piece from Joanne St. Lewis: Beautiful. @blogforequality http://www.bloggingforequality.ca/2013/12/a-dignified-warrior-for-peace-nelson_8.html … @firing_control

LGBT* Rights around the Globe

Russia

Leckey (McGill) reviews Kondakov (http://bit.ly/1iLcbfQ ) Scholarship in a Violent Time http://bit.ly/18fSk3Q  #lgbt #Russia @IReadJotwell

 

India

@PoojaaParmar

  • good to know govt interested in “legislative route” http://goo.gl/1D6ag5 
  • SC says legislature free to remove/ amend s. 377 IPC. Will any political party take this up? National elections next year!!

 

That time again….

 

Get yr exam-time pistachio needs filled in IFLS/Nthnsn suite. 3rd fl. Exit elevator. Turn L. While supplies last! pic.twitter.com/qZl8eWwhfb

Also: a nice place to sit. #morethanjustpistachios pic.twitter.com/ekYHATPkXx

 — Sonia Lawrence (@OsgoodeIFLS) December 9, 2013 

timely! #exams RT @BeckyBatagol: This is great! RT@WellnessForLaw: Healthy Lawyer: Stress Management @msjdtweets http://ms-jd.org/healthy-lawyer-stress-management …

Legal Education in Canada

 

Critical Resources

Don’t reinvent the wheel.  Other smart folk have done some of the work for you

Women of note

 

Conferences etc.

Yale Law School ‏@YaleLawSch

The 2013 Doctoral Scholarship Conference will explore the relationship between law and uncertainty. Learn more: http://ylaw.us/1bKsC8u 

 

December 6

Thank you, Osgoode Feminist Collective for reminding & memorializing. #dec6 #weremember #vaw pic.twitter.com/w452anRoIL

 

 

 

 

New in Print from UBC Press: Calder & Beaman, Polygamy's Rights and Wrongs

 

Click here for UBC press page

Gillian Calder (UVic) and Lori G. Beaman (UOttawa) Eds.

Polygamy’s Rights & Wrongs: Perspectives of Harm, Family, and Law 

Contents look really interesting – with a strong theme connecting them but quite diverse.    They are described in Lori Beaman’s introduction, “Is Polygamy Inherently Harmful?”, which, happily, you can read as a sample, here.  I hope your librarian is getting this (they may appreciate an email suggesting it).  Great cover design too!

 

1 Plus Ça Change … ? Bountiful’s Diverse and Durable Marriage Practices / Angela Campbell 

2 How Should Public Institutions Assess Religious Identity? The Case of Polygamy / Avigail Eisenberg 

3 Polygamy and the Predicament of Contemporary Criminal Law / Benjamin L. Berger 

4 Are They Not Us? A Personal Reflection on Polygamy / Arta Blanche Johnson 

5 Reflecting on Polygamy: What’s the Harm? / Rebecca Johnson 

6 Polygamy in the Parisian Banlieues: Debate and Discourse on the 2005 French Suburban Riots / Jennifer A. Selby 

7 Polygamy and Race-Thinking: A Genealogy / Margaret Denike 

8 Making Them Fit: The Australian National Census and Aboriginal Family Forms / Frances Morphy 

9 The Raids at Short Creek and Yearning for Zion Ranch and the Law of Unintended Consequences / Martha Bradley-Evans 

Conclusion: “To the Exclusion of All Others” — Polygamy, Monogamy, and the Legal Family in Canada / Gillian Calder 

Representation on Conference Panels: gentle pressure

Let’s start a[nother] conversation about representation on conference panels

my general thought is, who are the allies to whom we might suggest a policy of light or heavier pressure on conference organizers to get women on panels before you will agree to participate?  I know two people with such policies and I’m sure there are more.  Very junior academics and lawyers probably aren’t the folks who can take up this policy – but who might? Why not ask? After my tweets at the Federation of Asian Canadian lawyers (see below), I ran into a (the?) person who had seen them, has a policy, and is raising the issue in organizations he works with.

The thing is that once you are asked to be on panels, you

a. get better at it and

b. get asked to be on more

Feet in the door matter hugely, in other words.  Other justifications can be found in the links below.  Naturally, gender is not the only issue, so there are ways that women can be active participants with their own policies too, rather than simply “locked out”.

Here is info about the Gendered Conference Campaign from Feminist Philosophers.  Here and here you can find articles about the issue in tech. Here a man describes some of the challenges of operationalizing a hard pledge.

 

At  FACL [Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers] w  lawschool classmates & students i have taught from 2002 to last thursday. Lots of great women here. Binders full, possibly.
This particular panel at  FACL FedAsian CdnLawyers on public service =all men. But all racialised & 3  osgoode grads incl @jagmeetNDP
Hi  FACL – @GeraldChanRSCH is fab & <3 panel on Asian Canadian Litigators but  wherearetheAsianwomen? Yr VP Rebecca Huang wld be perfect!
[a few days later]
so i know some expert  lawyers &  lawprofs who try to avoid sitting on panels w/o any  women … I bet more out there @blberger @agarwalr
Broadening the representation on all kinds of expert panels requires those who ARE invited to suggest others & insist on representation.
see similar calls in tech & academic philosophy. How much resistance will these allies face in our  academic and  professional spaces?

 

 

PS: i have no qualms about people assuming this “quota” is a reason someone is on a panel.  I have plenty of reasons for dismissing this as a concern, including:

  • if people do a good job. who cares
  • if they don’t, there are plenty of men in that category too and one goal is that women should be able to be as prominently mediocre as men in this profession
  • invitations to be on panels are not distributed evenly nor does anyone pretend they are handed out by a meritocratic system.  There are all kinds of reasons why they are handed out.  Most are no more defensible – or less defensible – than a policy which prioritizes representation.

here is a problem I think i have encountered;

getting asked to be on too many things (two birds/one stone issue?) and allowing it to take up my time and set my agenda.

 

Day* old tweets (* may be slightly optimistic)

somewhat messy looking birdONE thing about Rob Ford

[because this quote is TOO fantastic] ♥ APerry re Ford: “The first rule of white club is you do not speak abt whiteness. This is perhaps esp true in Canada” http://bit.ly/1dbFqSG 

The challenge of pictures….

[this week the LSUC released the news that Ryerson won the contract to deliver the LPP.  The OBA, involved somehow with the Ryerson efforts, announced the arrival of the somewhat controversial program with a picture that…surprised me]

what is your reaction to this,  ontario  lawyer  WOC ? photo from OBA webpage re  LPP . 2nd tier? pic.twitter.com/fEoTJ1BVaQ

cover page of OBA website - four women, at least three visible minorities, in a law library type space.  Headline underneath: Alternatives to articling.

 

Join in/Nominate/Submit

Big Berkshire Conference on the  History of  Women in  Toronto May 2014 Early Bird $$ till Jan.15 h/t MJMossman

Social Policy Assoc ‏@SocialPolicyUK CFP  Feminist Review on ‘The Politics of Austerity’: http://bit.ly/167wsmy 

LSA “2nd Half Century Junior Scholars [short] Essay Competition” http://bit.ly/Ip23sk  see the question and details on LSA website.

know a worthy candidate? “Laura Legge Award recognizes Ont  women  lawyers who exemplify  leadership ” http://bit.ly/HSt2w8   Nominate

At the Law Schools

Tuition

RT @KatieBrack: Excellent “What I learned at law school: The poor need not apply”  Osgoode  Tuition http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/facts-and-arguments/what-i-learned-at-law-school-the-poor-need-not-apply/article15443887/ dashboard/follows/ … @

1/2  Accessibility of lawschool ($$ & otherwise) = defining issue, bc of the impact it has on other critical issues. Who’s in the building?

2/2 what gets understood, demanded, built on? who will be  lawyers  lawprofs  judges in our future? What is this  profession abt?  service

Feminists

Thanks Osgoode  Feminist Collective for making/taking space in the  lawschool. Presence matters. pic.twitter.com/FdlAl6XkQN

photo of posters describing "why i am a feminist" up at the law school

 

Events you Missed

(you wish you were there): Emma Cunliffe (UBC) at York

(you may be relieved to have missed this) I become Highly Irritated at the Munk Debate:“the end of men”

@ munk debate on the end of men w/ @blberger (not obsolete – he got the tix). Already quite annoyed. http://www.munkdebates.com/ 

Maybe this poster explains my annoyance? Strangely, @Blberger does not seem to find my asides as funny as i do. pic.twitter.com/CYaBiidjZq

[during the debate]

So many refs to animal procreation: feels like popculture sociobiologists convention.  MunkDebate @blberger still doesnt think i’m funny

Rosin wants to help men, as their era of dominance ends. Paglia (con) is concerned abt feminist denigration of men & end of female glamour.

I just….cannot. Audience giggling. @blberger say not usual  Munkdebate form. So, this aint an intersectional space.

Given this  munkdebate is clearly just an intellectual jello wrestle, seems churlish to point to lack of intersectional analysis excpt class

Here @munkdebate class analysis=way to hide, not reveal, plutocrat driven rising inequality. Oh wait! Here we go It isnt gender but class.

1 i like Caitlin Moran best = proof of problem 2 Toronto room, primed on Ford, v sympathetic to poor working class men.

Now Naomi Wolf is here via tape talking about …oh, anyway. Now: but patriarchy is alive & well in (name country white ppl dont live)

Rosin is, to be fair, taking that on. It was Rudyard Griffith (moderator) who made the claim

Rosin talking abt swedish mat leave of a year. Does she know what country this is? @blberger says “we” always =US at  munkdebates

Now is the part where we reassure the men that this is all about how we love then.  bechdelfail

[post debate conclusion]

16 Nov @kootenaydreams debate not worth taking too seriously in the end, which i suppose was the point. Women – not to be taken seriously.

 

 

 

 

 

 

question everything?: rape law/free speech | davina cooper

colourful speech bubblesQUESTION EVERYTHING?: RAPE LAW/ FREE SPEECH | davina cooper.
Do read this.  I found it really helpful and i wonder what others will think.

Davina Cooper (Kent Law School) includes links which explain the context for this particular intervention.  But the discussion she offers has broad relevance – for me, it had me thinking about the challenge in the classroom.

Plus I long to write lines like this:

 Helen’s opponent is flabby un-interrogated knowledge, vulnerable to flaying from the sharp sword of reason.