Find Ruthann Robson’s review of (Albany Law Dean) Penelope Andrews’ “From Cape Town to Kabul: Rethinking Strategies for Pursuing Women’s Human Rights” on Jotwell, here.
At its most hopeful, Andrews’ book presents the struggle for equality in South Africa as it was mounted against the Apartheid state, resulting in a new constitutional regime devoted to transformative law and politics. Andrews attributes the fact that this transformation included gender equality to a confluence of forces, but most importantly women’s participation. She suggests that the path chosen by South Africa is a model for many other nations, stressing that the involvement of women at all levels and phases is vital.
Find other papers by Andrews here (SSRN: open source). Warning: you`ll want to read any you haven`t already.
Consider speaking to your librarian to request that they order books which interest you, if you don’t already.
I reviewed Sara Ahmed’s On Being Included on Jotwell, here: bit.ly/1cdXfyg
After reading Presumed Incompetent: The Intersections of Race and Class for Women in Academia1 and attending the Symposium organized around the book by the Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law and Justice, I came home to find Sara Ahmed’s On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life waiting in my mailbox (this Jot is about On Being Included, although I’m quite prepared to say that I like Presumed Incompetent (lots) as well). The combination of these two books, both filled with personal stories and institutional insight, cracked my vision of my own place in the legal academy, and the “practice” of diversity, wide open. I read this work as a person who shares a (not surprising, really) number of experiences-as-academic with Ahmed. I read it just after reading the often deeply personal essays in Presumed Incompetent. I also read it as a person who has worked to avoid being noticed as “the problem” while trying to maintain a commitment to anti-racist work. These days, that means deep concern that my own strategies and efforts are nothing more than thinly veneered cooptation. All of these things, I think, amplified the impact of the book on me. But I still do not hesitate to recommend it to you, Jotwell reader
Go and read the full review, if you have a few minutes.
If you aren’t following Jotwell: Equality (and the other sections too), maybe consider it? A good way to have other people curate some of the flood of publications. Also, that picture of me on jotwell – more than 10 years old, so, yes. Especially in light of the fact that I can update social media 10x a day, I can probably manage a new photo.
Welcome to summer, if you’re in my hemisphere.
Isabel Grant (UBC Law) reviews Pascale Fournier (Ottawa Civil Law Section), Pascal McDougall & Anna R. Dekker, Dishonour, Provocation and Culture: Through the Beholder’s Eye?, 16(2) Can. Crim. L. Rev. 161 (2012), here.
In their thought-provoking work Dishonour, Provocation and Culture: Through the Beholder’s Eye?, Pascale Fournier, Pascal McDougall and Anna R. Dekker use a unique blend of historical, cross-cultural and empirical analysis to reveal the connections between so-called “honour killings” and intimate femicides where the defence of provocation is invoked. While “honour killings” typically involve “non-Western” defendants, and concerns about gender equality are more explicit, intimate femicides raise similar equality concerns which are often unrecognized and concealed. The authors acknowledge that there are differences between our typical conception of honour killings and the spousal homicides in which provocation is raised by Western defendants. For example, traditional honour killings invoke the idea of public honour, whereas in the provoked intimate femicides, “the locus of honour has shifted from the traditional extended family to the individual man” (178).
Elaine Craig (Dalhousie) reviews Anna Carline‘s article Of Frames, Cons and Affects: Constructing and Responding to Prostitution and Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation (in a special issue of Feminist Legal Studies, 2012 Vol 20. (3)) over at Jotwell. Enjoy the review and the article.
Anna Carline’s piece, … was of particular interest to me. Carline’s contribution interrogates the invocation of the vulnerable subject as a justification for state intervention with respect to sex work. She draws upon Judith Butler’s recent work theorizing life’s precarity in order to examine the race, class, and gender based differences in the distribution of vulnerability perpetuated by the Policing and Crime Act 2009 in England and Wales. Carline uses Butler’s framework to highlight how official discourses surrounding the adoption of this legislation framed the State as concerned with recognizing and protecting the vulnerable sex worker. This is a strategy that, according to Carline, ultimately resulted in reforms reflective of a law-and-order/morality approach to the sale of sex rather than a victim-centered approach.
via Forsaking Vulnerable Sex Work – Jotwell: Equality.
Here at Jotwell, McGill’s Robert Leckey has reviewed London based writer and UCL-affiliated Yuvraj Joshi’s Respectable Queerness.
On Joshi’s reading, and it is a fair one, the push for same-sex marriage has proceeded less by demanding respect than by attempting to demonstrate gay men’s and lesbians’ respectability. The agency associated with respectability is a key analytical insight: while assimilation refers to pressures imposed by the mainstream, respectability gestures to efforts made by gay men and lesbians to remake themselves as worthy of recognition. Think of the factual accounts of model plaintiffs advanced to courts in same-sex marriage litigation, which were advanced in order to establish couples’ stability and heteronormativity.
Check out the review and the original article.
Also touching on the respectability point as part of a much larger development of the feminist critique of same-sex marriage is Dr. Nicola Barker in Not the Marrying Kind: A Feminist Critique of Same-Sex Marriage (Palgrave-MacMillan Socio-Legal Studies 2012) (not that Nicola Barker, this one, from Kent Law School (UK)). You can hear her discuss the book here, podcast from Feminist Current. You can also download a sample chapter from the publisher here
Not the Marrying Kind is a new and comprehensive exploration of the contemporary same-sex marriage debates in several jurisdictions including Australia, Canada, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States. It departs from much of the existing scholarship on same-sex marriage, which argues either for or against marriage for same-sex couples. Instead, this book begins from a critical analysis of the institution of marriage itself (as well as separate forms of relationship recognition, such as civil partnership, PaCS, domestic partnership) and asks whether and how feminist critiques of marriage might be applied specifically to same-sex marriage. In doing this, the author combines the theories of second wave feminism with insights from contemporary queer theory.