{"title":"How Money for Legal Scholarship Disadvantages Feminism","authors":"Martha T. McCluskey","doi":"10.2202/1539-8323.1142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A dramatic infusion of outside money has shaped legal theory over the last several decades, largely to the detriment of feminist theory. Nonetheless, the pervasive influence of this funding is largely ignored in scholarly discussions of legal theory. This denial helps reinforce the marginal position of feminist scholarship and of women in legal theory. Conservative activists and funders have understood the central role of developing community culture and institutions, and have helped shift the prevailing framework for discussion of many questions of theory and policy through substantial investments in law-and-economics centers and in the Federalist Society. Comparing the institutional resources and structures of support for feminist or gender scholarship to those developed for economic analysis of law focused on free-market or neoliberal policy and business interests reveals substantial differences. Further, much of this conservative institution building has been dominated by men and has served to promote legal scholarship by white men in particular. I conclude by considering how feminist legal scholarship might better develop institutional support despite access to much less money.","PeriodicalId":34921,"journal":{"name":"Issues in Legal Scholarship","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1539-8323.1142","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues in Legal Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1539-8323.1142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
A dramatic infusion of outside money has shaped legal theory over the last several decades, largely to the detriment of feminist theory. Nonetheless, the pervasive influence of this funding is largely ignored in scholarly discussions of legal theory. This denial helps reinforce the marginal position of feminist scholarship and of women in legal theory. Conservative activists and funders have understood the central role of developing community culture and institutions, and have helped shift the prevailing framework for discussion of many questions of theory and policy through substantial investments in law-and-economics centers and in the Federalist Society. Comparing the institutional resources and structures of support for feminist or gender scholarship to those developed for economic analysis of law focused on free-market or neoliberal policy and business interests reveals substantial differences. Further, much of this conservative institution building has been dominated by men and has served to promote legal scholarship by white men in particular. I conclude by considering how feminist legal scholarship might better develop institutional support despite access to much less money.
期刊介绍:
Issues in Legal Scholarship presents cutting-edge legal and policy research using the format of online peer-reviewed symposia. The journal’s emphasis on interdisciplinary work and legal theory extends to recent symposium topics such as Single-Sex Marriage, The Reformation of American Administrative Law, and Catastrophic Risks. The symposia systematically address emerging issues of great significance, offering ongoing scholarship of interest to a wide range of policy and legal researchers. Online publication makes it possible for other researchers to find the best and latest quickly, as well as to join in further discussion. Each symposium aims to be a living forum with ongoing publications and commentaries.