Tag Archives: Sexual orientation

Just what you wanted: An Uncomfortable Conversation (in Atlanta) CFP

Osgoode’s Stu Marvel is down in Atlanta at Emory on a Post-Doc with the Vulnerability and the Human Condition initiative there.  She send this CFP. Deadline for proposals, May 29.  Something to turn to when your marking is done, perhaps?To catch up, resources on vulnerability and resilience can be found on the VCH Initiative website, here.

An Uncomfortable Conversation: Vulnerabilities and Identities:  September 14-15, 2012

Emory University School of Law, Gambrell Hall, Room 575, 1301 Clifton Road, Atlanta 30322

Critical legal scholars have long focused on identity, both highlighting the extent to which the law either protects or subordinates individuals based on their identity categories and also considering the ways in which identity classifications themselves are constructed and mediated by legal thought and culture. Recent movements in critical legal studies have contemplated the institutional and social conditions structuring inequality, including those that overlap with identity frameworks, such as intersectionality theory, as well as paradigms reaching beyond identity to more universal categories such as human rights, capabilities and, more recently, vulnerability.

This workshop seeks to explore the relationships between identity and vulnerability, as well as those between particularity and universality, with an emphasis on the ability of these concepts to deepen existing critiques of legal liberalism and advance questions of substantive justice.

We will examine the possibilities and problems associated with organizing critical legal theory around specific identity categories such as race, gender, or sexual orientation, on one hand, and more universal categories, such as vulnerability or dependency, on the other. Central to this investigation is how we examine and evaluate the impact of both identity-based and universality-based critical theory on the state and institutions organized to provide education, social welfare, employment and training, healthcare, environmental policy, family structure, and cultural recognition. In considering the recent revitalization of purportedly universal or “post-identity” approaches, we ask how these frameworks approach systemic disparities in access, opportunity and resources differently from identities analyses. Specifisec areas of inquiry might include consideration of these issues and questions in the context of feminisms, critical race theory, intersectionality, queer studies, disability, poststructuralism, transnationalism, political and the “class crits” movement.

Guiding Questions:

What are the relationships between vulnerability and identity/universality and particularity?

In what ways do both vulnerability and identity approaches inform or undermine each other?

Do more universal approaches to critical theory simply replicate existing identity paradigms in different forms?

Does identity enable us to think more complexly about the limits of universality? Is the reverse also true?

What is lost or gained by a “post-identity” approach to social justice issues? By an identity-focused approach? Can they be combined?

How do increasingly hostile majority reactions to identity-informed law and policy, like affirmative action, undermine the effectiveness of identity politics and identity-based critical theory?

How does competitiveness over scarce resources influence the shaping of identity politics and/or appeals to universality?

How are identity-based approaches to critical legal theory outside the US context different than within?

Where and to what extent do identity categories magnify balkanization, thus undermining coalitions?

How can identity categories advance social and legal organizing?

How does the state manufacture and maintain the salience of both identity-based and universality-based critical theory?

What does it mean to label something “post-identity”?

Are more universal frameworks necessarily post-identity?

When are some modes of subordination and marginalization more situational and specific and how are these related to identity? To vulnerability?

Workshop Contacts:

Martha Albertson Fineman, Emory University School of Law, mfineman@law.emory.edu

Frank Rudy Cooper, Suffolk University Law School, fcooper@suffolk.edu

Osamudia James, University of Miami School of Law, ojames@law.miami.edu

Katie E. Oliviero, FLT Postdoctoral Fellow, Emory School of Law, koliviero@emory.edu

Submission Procedure:

Please email a paper proposal by Tuesday, May 29th to Emily Hlavaty, FLT Program Coordinator: emily.hlavaty@emory.edu

Decisions will be made by ­­­­mid June and working paper drafts will be due September 4th so they can be distributed prior to the Workshop.

 

Workshop Details:

The Workshop begins Friday at 4PM in room 575 of Emory Law School (1301 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA), followed by dinner in the Hunter Atrium. Panels continue on Saturday from 9:30 AM to 5PM. Breakfast and lunch will be provided.

 

 

An Uncomfortable Conversation: Vulnerabilities and Identities 
September 14-15, 2012

Emory University School of Law, Gambrell Hall, Room 575, 1301 Clifton Road, Atlanta 30322

Critical legal scholars have long focused on identity, both highlighting the extent to which the law either protects or subordinates individuals based on their identity categories and also considering the ways in which identity classifications themselves are constructed and mediated by legal thought and culture. Recent movements in critical legal studies have contemplated the institutional and social conditions structuring inequality, including those that overlap with identity frameworks, such as intersectionality theory, as well as paradigms reaching beyond identity to more universal categories such as human rights, capabilities and, more recently, vulnerability. This workshop seeks to explore the relationships between identity and vulnerability, as well as those between particularity and universality, with an emphasis on the ability of these concepts to deepen existing critiques of legal liberalism and advance questions of substantive justice.  

 

We will examine the possibilities and problems associated with organizing critical legal theory around specific identity categories such as race, gender, or sexual orientation, on one hand, and more universal categories, such as vulnerability or dependency, on the other. Central to this investigation is how we examine and evaluate the impact of both identity-based and universality-based critical theory on the state and institutions organized to provide education, social welfare, employment and training, healthcare, environmental policy, family structure, and cultural recognition. In considering the recent revitalization of purportedly universal or “post-identity” approaches, we ask how these frameworks approach systemic disparities in access, opportunity and resources differently from identities analyses. Specific areas of inquiry might include consideration of these issues and questions in the context of feminisms, critical race theory, intersectionality, queer studies, disability, poststructuralism, transnationalism, political and the “class crits” movement.

Workshop Contacts:

Martha Albertson Fineman, Emory University School of Law, mfineman@law.emory.eduFrank Rudy Cooper

, Suffolk University Law School, fcooper@suffolk.eduOsamudia James,

University of Miami School of Law, ojames@law.miami.eduKatie E. Oliviero,

FLT Postdoctoral Fellow, Emory School of Law, koliviero@emory.edu 

Submission Procedure:

Please email a paper proposal by Tuesday, May 29th to Emily Hlavaty, FLT Program Coordinator: emily.hlavaty@emory.eduVarious resources on vulnerability and resilience can be found on the VCH Initiative website: Here 

Decisions will be made by ­­­­mid June and working paper drafts will be due September 4th so they can be distributed prior to the Workshop.

Workshop Details:

The Workshop begins Friday at 4PM in room 575 of Emory Law School (1301 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA), followed by dinner in the Hunter Atrium. Panels continue on Saturday from 9:30 AM to 5PM. Breakfast and lunch will be provided. 
Guiding Questions:

  • What are the relationships between vulnerability and identity/universality and particularity?
  • In what ways do both vulnerability and identity approaches inform or undermine each other?
  • Do more universal approaches to critical theory simply replicate existing identity paradigms in different forms?
  • Does identity enable us to think more complexly about the limits of universality? Is the reverse also true?
  • What is lost or gained by a “post-identity” approach to social justice issues? By an identity-focused approach? Can they be combined?
  • How do increasingly hostile majority reactions to identity-informed law and policy, like affirmative action, undermine the effectiveness of identity politics and identity-based critical theory?
  • How does competitiveness over scarce resources influence the shaping of identity politics and/or appeals to universality?
  • How are identity-based approaches to critical legal theory outside the US context different than within?
  • Where and to what extent do identity categories magnify balkanization, thus undermining coalitions?
  • How can identity categories advance social and legal organizing?
  • How does the state manufacture and maintain the salience of both identity-based and universality-based critical theory?
  • What does it mean to label something “post-identity”?
  • Are more universal frameworks necessarily post-identity?
  • When are some modes of subordination and marginalization more situational and specific and how are these related to identity? To vulnerability?

 

This email was sent to emily.hlavaty@emory.edu by emily.hlavaty@emory.edu |

 

Emory University School of Law | 1301 Clifton Road | Atlanta | GA | 30322

ICJ publication: Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Justice- A Comparative Law Casebook

Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Justice- A Comparative Law Casebook. (yes, this link takes you to the whole book, available for download).

This is pretty marvelous — many chapters each collecting case summaries on a particular topic from around the work.

From the Forward by The Hon. Michael Kirby AC CMG:

This is a remarkable book. It tells an extraordinary tale. It collects more than 100 court decisions of comparatively recent years in which judges of many lands have had to grapple with decisions about the legal rights of members of sexual minorities (homosexuals, bisexuals, transsexuals, intersex and other ‘queer’ people).
The collection is remarkable, in that it shows the extraordinary progress that has been made in a couple of decades, when measured against the hostility and inequality that marked this topic of the law over hundreds of years previously. The hostility and inequality are by no means over. The cases recorded in this book come from diverse countries. But most of them are from the courts of developed nations. In many countries of Africa, the Caribbean and Asia, inequality and injustice continue to prevail with legal backing and societal support. Still, the very publication of this book, with its clear message of parliamentary and judicial progress in the cause of equality and basic rights, will itself contribute to the global process that is underway. Judges and lawyers will read the book. They will take heart and courage to press forward in their own lands until the last remnants of ignorance and prejudice are finally removed from the face of the law

From the Introduction:

In 2009 the International Commission of Jurists began to gather together national court decisions that addressed questions concerning sexual orientation and gender identity. It did so because it had become evident that battles over some of the most controversial issues of the day were being waged in domestic courts. A very small number of cases can be brought before international human rights bodies – such as the regional human rights commissions and courts and UN treaty bodies – but increasingly international human rights arguments were being heard at the domestic level. What you have before you is the result of this research.

The fourteen chapters are organised by topic. Each chapter begins with a general introduction to that particular field of law, followed by case summaries. The latter set forth the legal issue and the relevant domestic, comparative and international law, and then summarise the arguments, reasoning, and result. Cases that are summarised in the Casebook are bold-faced throughout the text. Altogether, the Casebook consists of 108 cases, from 41 countries across a variety of regions, covering a span of more than forty years. The vast majority of decisions, nevertheless, date from the past decade. The pace of change is clearly accelerating.

Another H/T to the amazing list serv from the Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Programme at U of T: REPROHEALTHLAW-L