Nicola Barker speaks on ‘Feminism, Family and the Politics of Austerity’ (with accompanying powerpoint slides); Sinead Ring speaks on ‘The Pernicious Nature of Rape Myths and How They Continue to Affect Rape Prosecutions’; Maria Drakopoulou speaks on ‘Feminism, Tradition and the Question of Sexual Violence’; and Rosemary Hunter acts as discussant, commenting on all three papers.
Easing back from my vacation into the webworld. Strangely, I didn’t miss it much this time. I think that means that i am now clearly associating the web with work – this is not, I think, a good thing. But this next is – a great looking CF Proposals via Nicola Barker (Kent) @nicolaJbarker (see previous IFLS posts re Nicola here) and Suzanne Lenon (Lethbridge) @kootenaydreams
Note that this conference might be at Onati in Spain – the fall back is ….Paris. So there is that too.
Radically Rethinking Marriage
Deadline for Submissions: September 20, 2013 (Workshop: July 2015)
find this conference on FB, here.
Over the last few months the issue of same-sex marriage has once again received a lot of international attention with the partial repeal of DOMA in the United States, the overturning of Proposition 8 in California, and the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United Kingdom. But as with previous debates in countries that have already introduced same-sex marriage, the public debates have contained little or no critical interrogation of the institution of marriage itself. Feminist critiques of marriage, once widespread in academia, have been silenced by the difficulty of interjecting in an argument strongly shaped by discourses of love, and where the premise of the dispute is itself delimited by a framing that understands marriage as an unquestioned good that should either be protected in its ‘traditional’ form, or available to all couples. But how could feminists radically rethink marriage? What is at stake (politically, materially, affectively) in such an endeavour? What would “rethinking marriage” look like?
This two-day workshop seeks to bring together feminist scholars working across disciplines to radically rethink law(s) of and around marriage. We seek papers that offer an engaged analysis and re-imagining of marriage within law, attending to the complexities of its racial, sexual, gendered, class and colonial effects. Abstracts may engage any of the following (or other) broad themes:
• Same-sex marriage
• Alternative property regimes
• the ‘Beyond Marriage’ movement
• Sovereignty and/or decolonization
• Marriage and wealth
In the spirit of the feminist judgments projects,* we ask that abstracts (1) identify a specific case, statute or key article and/or debate from the literature and (2) offer a re-thinking, new interpretation or rewriting: How could we decide a case or interpret a statute differently? Is it even possible to (re)imagine its transformative potentiality? How could we fill gaps in the key articles or debates, in ways that fundamentally challenge the existing legal institution of marriage? Is there a feminist alternative to marriage?
Submissions are encouraged from scholars, activists and artists and are not limited to traditional academic papers.
Once we have abstracts we will apply to hold the workshop at the International Institute for the Sociology of Law in Oñati, Spain.
If this is not possible, it will be held at the University of Kent’s campus in Paris. Participants are responsible for their own travel and health insurance, travel costs, registration fee, and accommodations.
Deadline for Submissions:
A 500 word abstract and title, along with affiliations and a short biography, should be sent in electronic form (Word document) to Suzanne Lenon, Women & Gender Studies, University of Lethbridge, firstname.lastname@example.org and Nicola Barker, Kent Law School, University of Kent, email@example.com by September 20, 2013.
Please do not hesitate to contact us for further information.
*For more information on the Feminist Judgment Projects, see: Women’s Court of Canada, http://womenscourt.ca/home/; Feminist Judgments Project http://www.kent.ac.uk/law/fjp/; Irish Feminist Judgments Project http://humanrights.ie/announcements/introducing-the-irish-feminist-judgments-project/; and Australian Feminist Judgments Project http://www.law.uq.edu.au/australian-feminist-judgments-project. See also E. Brems (ed.) Diversity and European Human Rights: Rewriting Judgments of the ECHR (CUP, 2013).
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.
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.