Tag Archives: articles

NIP: Breakups by Deborah Tuerkheimer in Yale J. of Law & Feminism & how to use HeinOnline Table of Contents Alerts

Fascinating abstractice.

This Article identifies an overlooked criminalization gap. While
the existence of a private sphere in which violence is allowed has been formally
repudiated, a subtler form of legal immunity persists. Relationship status-that
is, whether or not a couple is involved in an ongoing relationship-continues to
construct crime. Though physical violence between intimate partners is
categorically outlawed, patterns of controlling behavior that encompass
physical violence may or may not be lawful. These patterns of controlling
behavior are legally permitted when two people are together. Yet these same
patterns become illegal if, and only if, the couple separates. The law thus
prohibits behavior that it permits before the breakup. I call this the de facto separation requirement and offer a conceptual framework that explains its
endurance. On analysis, the differential treatment of pre- and post-breakup patterns cannot be justified.

Available on SSRN here, or Heinonline (not open access) here.


This came to my attention because i get some email alerts from Hein Online, via the MyHein service.  Again, all of this  is only for those who have access to Hein, but it can be a useful service, if you can control the number of alerts you subscribe to…:

You can create an eTOC alert for one or more titles which will you send you an email every time the
title(s) you selected have been updated. To do this, browse to a title and click on the Create eTOC Alert
link. You will then receive a message that says the title has been added to your “eTOC alerts”.

What you get is an email with the Table of Contents for the new volume and clickable links to all the articles.  Handy, fun, efficient.

A little roundup of reading for reading week

I’ve been neglecting the blogging, again in favour of easy but less satisfying tweets.  Here is a small round up of reading material, for reading week, which at Osgoode is… next week. 

First, this (which is from twitter, so sorry for duplication):  17 Essays by Female Writers That Everyone Should Read buff.ly/14OeowT what a treasure trove this is. Incls 1 law prof, Ruthann Robson   (a piece that is already on at least one Canadian law school syllabus that I know of).   The list is very america-centric, but it is still a list of 17 essays you might like.  And of course if you don’t, it’s the inspiration for your own list.  These aren’t particularly, or at all, law, but they are examples of well written and thoughtful non fiction – when does that ever get old?

Second,  Jotwell.  If you are looking for things to read, the Jotwell Equality section (Kim Brooks & I are nominally editors to the set of contributors) gives you one new monthly option – check out the other sections for other reads.  This month, Davina Cooper is recommending Erik Swyngedouw, Interrogating post-democratization: Reclaiming egalitarian political spaces, 30(7) Political Geography 370 (2011).  This isn’t light reading, as you can see from the quote below, but both the review and the article deserve a chance.

Swyngedouw suggests democratic political spaces are active moments in constructing new egalitarian spatialities inside and through existing geographies of the police order. These active moments go beyond demands for inclusion that work to sustain a post-political consensus; they go beyond rituals of resistance which leave the police order intact; and they go beyond acts of violence that generate and legitimate, in turn, the reciprocating violence of the state. “Proper politics,” Swyngedouw suggests, involves practices that challenge the symbolic order of the police; it involves designing space as an egalitarian and libertarian field of disagreement, opening up room for other speech acts; and it involves radically re-organizing what can be heard, seen and known. At the same time, politics may take shape as refusal: “I’d prefer not to” — a strategy Swyngedouw argues that is also an invitation to think again, and to form new egalitarian imaginaries. Fundamentally, Swyngedouw argues we need to rethink equality politically – not as a sociological concept which demands policy responses to inequality but as a presupposed condition of democracy.

Third, some books.

I still haven’t ordered Mariana Valverde’s latest (the review in the Globe wasn’t positive, but made me want to read the book): Everyday life on the street: City governance in an age of diversity (Chicago)

Gender, Religion, and Family Law: Theorizing Conflicts between Women’s Rights and Cultural Traditions Eds Lisa Fishbayn Joffe, Sylvia Neil out of the Brandeis Project on Gender Culture Religion and the Law.   Here is a link to the Table of Contents, which includes papers by two women working at Canadian law schools Ayelet Shachar and Pascale Fournier.  Lisa Fishbayn Joffe is an Osgoode Alum, too. 

Columbia U P (i’m not using links to online booksellers anymore – a bit late, but I’ll be linking to the presses instead and will encourage the effort to find these at a bricks and mortar store or library….) is republishing 1983’s Scotch Verdict: The Real-Life Story That Inspired “The Children’s Hour”  by Lillian Faderman.  Luckily for me, I drive @lawandlit to the subway and chatter at her the whole way – she was the one who let me know that the “new book” i was curious about was about thirty years old.  Ahem. Anyway, 30 years old means “new to many of us”, I shall claim.  New forward, but it’s not clear whether there’s any new material, so probably not. 

In 1810, a Scottish student named Jane Cumming accused her school mistresses, Jane Pirie and Marianne Woods, of having an affair in the presence of their students. Dame Helen Cumming Gordon, the wealthy and powerful grandmother of the accusing student, advised her friends to remove their daughters from the Drumsheugh boarding school. Within days, the institution was deserted and the two women were deprived of their livelihoods.

Award-winning author Lillian Faderman recreates the events surrounding this notorious case, which became the basis for Lillian Hellman’s famous play, The Children’s Hour. Reconstructing the libel suit filed by Pirie and Woods—which resulted in a scotch verdict, or a verdict of inconclusive/not proven—Faderman builds a compelling narrative from court transcripts, judges’ notes, witnesses’ contradictory testimony, and the prejudices of the men presiding over the case. Her fascinating portrait documents the social, economic, and sexual pressures shaping the lives of nineteenth-century women and the issues of class and gender contributing to their marginalization.

Finally, from the Thesis Whisperer  who is also/really Dr. Inger Mewburn of Australia.  She runs a really amazing site with all kinds of fabulous things for grad students, supervisors, academics…but this time it isn’t one of her great tips or tricks, but rather just a post, about academic assholes.  It serves as both self check (am i doing that?) and many other things (helpful cheat sheet for ranting, “oh, that’s what that was about” reminder after faculty talk, warning about what will happen if you don’t become the solution, fun anthropological approach to academic culture).  Worth a read.  She concludes: “I am deeply uncomfortable with the observation that being an asshole can be advantageous for your career” and asks us all to think about what we can do about it.  She’s on twitter here. If you have grad students, or are a grad student, you might want to have a look.

Here are some other little snippets from Twitter  you might have missed.

Ready to read? Other suggestions welcome.   I am off to Kent and Boalt Hall and  long plane rides = time to read.

Women, Gender and the Law eJournal: Subscribe on SSRN

This SSRN e-Journal distributes:

…working and accepted paper abstracts that relate to the relationship between women and the law, and gender and the law. The eJournal is interested in a wide range of topics with the focus of the eJournal being critical examinations of gender and the law. Interdisciplinary work is invited, as is research on legal education and the scholarship of law teaching as it relates to women and gender.

Believe it or not, this is another Kim Brooks production.  SSRN is such a useful service – it sends many gems my way.

Wondering what SSRN is?

Social Science Research Network (SSRN) is a world wide collaborative of over 183,000 authors and more than 1.3 million users that is devoted to the rapid worldwide dissemination of social science research. Founded in 1994, it is composed of a number of specialized research networks in each of the social sciences. Each of SSRN’s networks encourages the early distribution of research results by reviewing and distributing submitted abstracts and full text papers from scholars around the world. SSRN encourages readers to communicate directly with other subscribers and authors concerning their own and other’s research. Through our email abstract eJournals we currently reach over 400,000 people in approximately 140 different countries.  From the SSRN FAQ page, here.

I subscribe to a small number of the eJournals and Women, Gender & the Law is one.  Here are all the abstracts from this eJournal, and if you are signed up for SSRN (open to all) you can subscribe here.


I’ve just pasted in the latest 10 articles from this eJournal, so you can see how interesting this journal can  be!
Incl. Electronic Paper Two Mothers in Law and Fact
Robert Leckey
McGill University – Faculty of Law
Date Posted: April 07, 2012
Working Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper Mediating Multiculturally: Culture and the Ethical Mediator
MEDIATION ETHICS, Ellen Waldman, ed., San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2011, UC Irvine School of Law Research Paper No. 2012-26
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Georgetown University Law Center
Date Posted: April 05, 2012
Working Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper Undermining Congressional Overrides: The Hydra Problem in Statutory Interpretation
Texas Law Review, Vol. 90, 2012, Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 202
Deborah A. Widiss
Indiana University Maurer School of Law
Date Posted: April 05, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

DOMA’s Bankruptcy
Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 79, pp. 1-28, 2011
Mark Strasser
Capital University – Law School
Date Posted: April 04, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper Discriminative Provisions of Islamic Law of Inheritance Against Women
Sukanya Narain and Rameshwari R. Rao
National Law University Jodhpur and affiliation not provided to SSRN
Date Posted: April 03, 2012
Working Paper Series

Nonconsensual Insemination: Battery
Journal of Law and Social Deviance, Vol. 3, 2012
Carmen M. Cusack
affiliation not provided to SSRN
Date Posted: April 03, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper The Women Violence in Pakistan: Evidence from Rural and Urban Areas
European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 267-274, 2010
Arsalan Mujahid Ghouri and Naheed Abrar
affiliation not provided to SSRN and affiliation not provided to SSRN
Date Posted: April 03, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Escaping Battered Credit: A Proposal for Repairing Credit Reports Damaged by Domestic Violence
University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Forthcoming
Angela K. Littwin
University of Texas School of Law
Date Posted: April 01, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper Have Truth and Reconciliation Commissions Helped Remediate Human Rights Violations Against Women? A Feminist Analysis of the Past and Formula for the Future
Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law (JICL), Vol. 20, No. 1, p. 143, 2011, Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-05
Peggy Maisel
Florida International University College of Law
Date Posted: March 31, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Incl. Electronic Paper Law, History, and Feminism
FEMINIST LEGAL HISTORY: ESSAYS ON WOMEN AND LAW, T. Thomas & T. Boisseau, eds., NYU Press, April 2011, U of Akron Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-05
Tracy A. Thomas and Tracey Jean Boisseau
University of Akron School of Law and University of Akron
Date Posted: March 30, 2012
Accepted Paper Series

Articles reviewed on Jotwell

I really like the idea of Jotwell, see my previous post here.  Here are two jotwell articles on criminal law that are worth considering.  Both go far beyond doctrinal considerations and might interest those who work in a variety of areas.

Both reflect on criminal law initiatives which might initially appeal to many feminists. They push us to question the larger  implications of measures designed to protect the vulnerable.  In one, the measure might have uneven impact racially.  In the other article, it is the piling up of measures aimed at a particular kind of crime which creates a new context and cultural phenomenon.  If you click through to the reviews, there are links to SSRN for both articles.

The first review is of Corey Rayburn Yung, The Emerging Criminal War Against Sex Offenders (2009, forthcoming Harvard Civil Rights- Civil Liberties Law Review).

The reviewer, Prof. Angela P. Harris of Boalt Hall, says (but really, read her whole review – i found it so interesting I almost forgot to go and pick up the article she’s talking about!):

…. lot of criminal law and procedure scholarship is incredibly boring for this reason: It pretends that doctrinal craft and/or moral theory actually matter. The work that isn’t boring, however, situates criminal law and procedure in its cultural and political context; and the article I like a lot this month is an excellent example, providing a useful guide to an ongoing crisis in American law and culture.

The second piece is a review of Aviva Orenstein, Propensity or Stereotype?: A Misguided Evidence Experiment in Indian Country, 19 Cornell J. Law & Pub. Pol. 173 (2009).  Prof. Myrna Raeder of Southwestern writes: 

In 1994, in a well documented trade, Congress adopted Federal Rules of Evidence 413-415 as the quid pro quo for securing the deciding vote necessary to pass the then pending Violent Crime Control Act. Rules 413-414 specifically permit propensity evidence in sexual assault and child molestation cases. Professor Aviva Orenstein investigates how these rules have been (mis)applied in federal court. Her thought-provoking essay decries the disproportionate use of the rules against Indian defendants, and suggests the repeated presence of negatively stereotyped Indian defendants may actually help perpetuate the myth that rapists are easily identified “others,” an attitude that makes acquaintance rapes incredibly difficult to prove. She also suggests that stereotyping reinforces the propensity evidence and may lead judges to more willingly accept character evidence beyond sex crimes,Orenstein has been influential in applying feminist jurisprudence to evidentiary issues, not only concerning topics that are associated with women’s issues such as rape and domestic violence, but also in contexts where the link is less obvious, such as apologies by doctors. Previously, she critiqued the use of propensity evidence in No Bad Men!: A Feminist Analysis of Character Evidence in Rape Trials, 49  Hastings L.J. 663 (1998), suggesting such evidence violates feminist values and presenting alternative evidentiary solutions to strengthening the government’s case. Like her, I view myself as a feminist who is sympathetic to the plight of victims of rape and child abuse, while remaining sensitive to issues of fairness and constitutional rights of criminal defendants. Thus, I knew this article would analyze difficult questions such as whether stereotyping of Indians1 is encouraged by the propensity rules, and why these rules do not necessarily further feminist goals.