Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1672613
Laura L. Griffin, L. R. Danil
Feminist scholars and theorists have long engaged with the body and questioned its relation to law. This special issue continues this legacy, while also drawing on and contributing to more recent scholarly interest in embodiment, gender and law. The issue was inspired by a wish to foreground the body, embodiment and lived experience in relation to law, from both contemporary and historical perspectives. It examines the ways in which lawmay preclude, encourage, marginalise or stratify certain kinds of embodiment, and how particular kinds of embodiment may be gendered, sexed, classed and/or racialized, includingby lawand legal institutions. Suchdiscussionsquestion the embodied consequences of particular legal decisions, and vice-versa, potential modes of embodied resistance that might drive legal, and broader social, change. What bodily effects and embodied affects are shaped by law,whetherdirectlyor indirectly, andwhat are the embodied consequences of such decisions/omissions?What theoretical or methodological perspectives can enhanceorenrichourunderstandingof the relationshipbetween lawand the body, and law and embodiment? We have also sought to attend to recent developments across varied disciplineswhich challenge commonunderstandings of the body as individuated and static – instead exploring the inherent plasticity of the body, and the ways in which embodiment is relational, situated, subjective and continuous. Many of the articles in this issue follow those whose bodies and modes of embodiment are marginalised – such as prisoners, trans young people, children of misattributed paternity, birthing fathers, the colonised – and their journeys of engaging with, and disrupting, legal orders and institutions. We see in these accounts a complex interaction between old and new legal imaginaries and sensoria, as well as the difficulties faced by legal decision-makers in grappling with the inadequacies of simplistic, cis-heteropatriarchal understandings of gendered/sexed bodies. As several of our authors demonstrate, while such disruption may be productive in the sense of challenging exclusion or hierarchy, we must continue to question law’s emancipatory potential. Hegemonic notions of whose bodies are violable, or how bodies are gendered/ sexed, often persist in unexpected or unintended ways.
{"title":"Law’s Changing Bodies: Contemporary and Historical Perspectives on Law and Embodiment","authors":"Laura L. Griffin, L. R. Danil","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1672613","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1672613","url":null,"abstract":"Feminist scholars and theorists have long engaged with the body and questioned its relation to law. This special issue continues this legacy, while also drawing on and contributing to more recent scholarly interest in embodiment, gender and law. The issue was inspired by a wish to foreground the body, embodiment and lived experience in relation to law, from both contemporary and historical perspectives. It examines the ways in which lawmay preclude, encourage, marginalise or stratify certain kinds of embodiment, and how particular kinds of embodiment may be gendered, sexed, classed and/or racialized, includingby lawand legal institutions. Suchdiscussionsquestion the embodied consequences of particular legal decisions, and vice-versa, potential modes of embodied resistance that might drive legal, and broader social, change. What bodily effects and embodied affects are shaped by law,whetherdirectlyor indirectly, andwhat are the embodied consequences of such decisions/omissions?What theoretical or methodological perspectives can enhanceorenrichourunderstandingof the relationshipbetween lawand the body, and law and embodiment? We have also sought to attend to recent developments across varied disciplineswhich challenge commonunderstandings of the body as individuated and static – instead exploring the inherent plasticity of the body, and the ways in which embodiment is relational, situated, subjective and continuous. Many of the articles in this issue follow those whose bodies and modes of embodiment are marginalised – such as prisoners, trans young people, children of misattributed paternity, birthing fathers, the colonised – and their journeys of engaging with, and disrupting, legal orders and institutions. We see in these accounts a complex interaction between old and new legal imaginaries and sensoria, as well as the difficulties faced by legal decision-makers in grappling with the inadequacies of simplistic, cis-heteropatriarchal understandings of gendered/sexed bodies. As several of our authors demonstrate, while such disruption may be productive in the sense of challenging exclusion or hierarchy, we must continue to question law’s emancipatory potential. Hegemonic notions of whose bodies are violable, or how bodies are gendered/ sexed, often persist in unexpected or unintended ways.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"1 - 4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1672613","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41425179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1646111
H. Robert
In an era of quick, cheap and readily available genetic heredity testing, the Family Courts are increasingly asked to determine legal parentage in light of DNA evidence. For the children involved, that can mean that their genetic bodily fragments are used to retrospectively ‘correct’ their legal kinship relationships and legal identity. Where genetic paternity has been misattributed, judges have erased children’s legal connections with misattributed fathers (and their kin) from birth certificates irrespective of any social and relational meaning that these relationships and identities may have accumulated. This article critiques the genetic thinking apparent in family law judgments on legal parentage. It draws on theories of embodiment to argue that judges use a rhetoric of ‘biotruth’ to engage with the child’s body only as genetic fragments. In reconstructing children’s ‘true’ legal parentage and identity from their genetic fragments, law disembodies children themselves, relating to them as evidence of a reproductive transaction in which men who did not get the genetic child they bargained for may be able to obtain a refund of child support paid. In doing so, the current model of legal parentage fails to engage with the children involved in these disputes as embodied and relational legal persons.
{"title":"Genetic Bodily Fragments and Relational Embodiment: Judicial Rhetoric about ‘Biological Truth’ in Paternity Disputes in the Family Courts","authors":"H. Robert","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1646111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1646111","url":null,"abstract":"In an era of quick, cheap and readily available genetic heredity testing, the Family Courts are increasingly asked to determine legal parentage in light of DNA evidence. For the children involved, that can mean that their genetic bodily fragments are used to retrospectively ‘correct’ their legal kinship relationships and legal identity. Where genetic paternity has been misattributed, judges have erased children’s legal connections with misattributed fathers (and their kin) from birth certificates irrespective of any social and relational meaning that these relationships and identities may have accumulated. This article critiques the genetic thinking apparent in family law judgments on legal parentage. It draws on theories of embodiment to argue that judges use a rhetoric of ‘biotruth’ to engage with the child’s body only as genetic fragments. In reconstructing children’s ‘true’ legal parentage and identity from their genetic fragments, law disembodies children themselves, relating to them as evidence of a reproductive transaction in which men who did not get the genetic child they bargained for may be able to obtain a refund of child support paid. In doing so, the current model of legal parentage fails to engage with the children involved in these disputes as embodied and relational legal persons.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"63 - 90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1646111","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47277250","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1636753
Carolyn Craig
This paper discusses a visual arts practice that articulates the lived experience of incarceration as a form of knowledge production that gives voice to the affect of carceral practices. The author considers this knowledge in relation to standard forms of academic discourse, seen as an extension of a static framework of representational practices. Standard academic papers are discussed as forming part of a larger logic of Othering that views the incarcerated female as ‘subject’ within the scaffoldings of power. The way such power acts over the body is discussed in relation to broader social actions over the raced/gendered and classed body. These coercive frameworks enact a permanent state of enclosure, denial, erasure and abuse, where prison becomes an extension of a lifelong suite of punitive schedules. The author’s practice enacts affect in order to give agency to this lived experience and voice subjectivity over being the subject of someone else’s perspectival regime of knowledge.
{"title":"Gendered Custody: The Drowning Moment that Never Ends (Inertia as Social Training)","authors":"Carolyn Craig","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1636753","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1636753","url":null,"abstract":"This paper discusses a visual arts practice that articulates the lived experience of incarceration as a form of knowledge production that gives voice to the affect of carceral practices. The author considers this knowledge in relation to standard forms of academic discourse, seen as an extension of a static framework of representational practices. Standard academic papers are discussed as forming part of a larger logic of Othering that views the incarcerated female as ‘subject’ within the scaffoldings of power. The way such power acts over the body is discussed in relation to broader social actions over the raced/gendered and classed body. These coercive frameworks enact a permanent state of enclosure, denial, erasure and abuse, where prison becomes an extension of a lifelong suite of punitive schedules. The author’s practice enacts affect in order to give agency to this lived experience and voice subjectivity over being the subject of someone else’s perspectival regime of knowledge.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"13 - 5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1636753","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45432592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1636752
Senthorun Raj
The distress and anxiety faced by young trans(gender) people generates varied social, medical, and legal concerns. In Australia, minors have had to appeal to the jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia if they wished to undergo medical or surgical changes to their bodies in order to alleviate ‘gender dysphoria’ and affirm their gender. In approving almost every application to date and, most recently, dispensing with the requirement to seek Court approval, the Family Court has exhibited care, concern, and compassion when addressing anxieties faced by young trans people and formulating therapeutic determinations to relieve those anxieties. This paper maps out this affective terrain – the alleviation of anxiety and cultivation of care – by exploring key appellate Family Court decisions relating to young trans people made between 2004 and 2018. A queer engagement with Australian Family Court decisions enables us to consider the extent to which alleviating anxiety and cultivating care secure the wellbeing of young trans and gender non-conforming people.
{"title":"Alleviating Anxiety and Cultivating Care: Young Trans People in the Family Court of Australia","authors":"Senthorun Raj","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1636752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1636752","url":null,"abstract":"The distress and anxiety faced by young trans(gender) people generates varied social, medical, and legal concerns. In Australia, minors have had to appeal to the jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia if they wished to undergo medical or surgical changes to their bodies in order to alleviate ‘gender dysphoria’ and affirm their gender. In approving almost every application to date and, most recently, dispensing with the requirement to seek Court approval, the Family Court has exhibited care, concern, and compassion when addressing anxieties faced by young trans people and formulating therapeutic determinations to relieve those anxieties. This paper maps out this affective terrain – the alleviation of anxiety and cultivation of care – by exploring key appellate Family Court decisions relating to young trans people made between 2004 and 2018. A queer engagement with Australian Family Court decisions enables us to consider the extent to which alleviating anxiety and cultivating care secure the wellbeing of young trans and gender non-conforming people.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"111 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1636752","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44994289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1667777
G. Baars
Abstract Law’s role in upholding and continually reproducing the cisheteropatriarchy is increasingly being challenged in Western courts. This is happening directly, by ‘non-gendered’ claimants wishing to undo law’s compulsory gender performance, and by ‘birthing men’ seeking to queer law’s gender binary. Indirectly ‘fucking’ law’s gendering function are the defendants in the so-called ‘gender deception’ prosecutions. Here we see the judicial system reasserting its hegemony as heteronorm-maker and enforcer. A different face of state pushback against queer anti-normativity shows in accommodation: several European courts have recently ordered the creation of a third gender option. This paper evaluates these ‘Queer Cases’, and asks what the queer struggle with the heteronormative can tell us about law’s social function, its relationship to the body, its material effects and emancipatory potential more broadly. Can we queer the legal structures that seek to know, categorise, assign, police and contain our genders and sexualities or is now the time to say ‘fuck law’?
{"title":"Queer Cases Unmake Gendered Law, Or, Fucking Law’s Gendering Function","authors":"G. Baars","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1667777","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1667777","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Law’s role in upholding and continually reproducing the cisheteropatriarchy is increasingly being challenged in Western courts. This is happening directly, by ‘non-gendered’ claimants wishing to undo law’s compulsory gender performance, and by ‘birthing men’ seeking to queer law’s gender binary. Indirectly ‘fucking’ law’s gendering function are the defendants in the so-called ‘gender deception’ prosecutions. Here we see the judicial system reasserting its hegemony as heteronorm-maker and enforcer. A different face of state pushback against queer anti-normativity shows in accommodation: several European courts have recently ordered the creation of a third gender option. This paper evaluates these ‘Queer Cases’, and asks what the queer struggle with the heteronormative can tell us about law’s social function, its relationship to the body, its material effects and emancipatory potential more broadly. Can we queer the legal structures that seek to know, categorise, assign, police and contain our genders and sexualities or is now the time to say ‘fuck law’?","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"15 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1667777","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42243316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1650629
Alecia Simmonds
What would the history of intimate violence look like if we traced it through the civil courts rather than the criminal courts? How did legal categories relevant to civil proceedings, such as a promise, seduction, consent and coverture, interact to create violable female bodies? In a field heavily dominated by studies of criminal trials, this paper redirects scholarly attention to civil actions used by women in the past to protest male violence and female suffering. This article reveals how the law continued to sanction intimate violence at the very moment when it purportedly sought to restrain it, through the case study of disgraced politician Myles McRae, who in the 1890s was petitioned by his wife Clara McRae for divorce on the grounds of marital cruelty and adultery, and whose mistress Ilma Vaughan then sued him for breach of promise of marriage and assault. The 1890s, much like the present, was a time when public space opened up to allow for discussion of gender violence and legal reform promised women change, yet intimate abuse continued to be legitimated through law. I argue that the law’s sanctioning of violence can best be explained through a more complex understanding of coverture – a doctrine that began not at the marital altar, as is usually claimed, but during courtship and whose effects persisted long after divorce and property reform dissolved the doctrine of marital unity. Thinking of coverture more as a constellation of ideas than as a block legal category allows us to more accurately assess its continuation at the very instance of its supposed dissolution.
{"title":"Courtship, Coverture and Marital Cruelty: Historicising Intimate Violence in the Civil Courts","authors":"Alecia Simmonds","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1650629","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1650629","url":null,"abstract":"What would the history of intimate violence look like if we traced it through the civil courts rather than the criminal courts? How did legal categories relevant to civil proceedings, such as a promise, seduction, consent and coverture, interact to create violable female bodies? In a field heavily dominated by studies of criminal trials, this paper redirects scholarly attention to civil actions used by women in the past to protest male violence and female suffering. This article reveals how the law continued to sanction intimate violence at the very moment when it purportedly sought to restrain it, through the case study of disgraced politician Myles McRae, who in the 1890s was petitioned by his wife Clara McRae for divorce on the grounds of marital cruelty and adultery, and whose mistress Ilma Vaughan then sued him for breach of promise of marriage and assault. The 1890s, much like the present, was a time when public space opened up to allow for discussion of gender violence and legal reform promised women change, yet intimate abuse continued to be legitimated through law. I argue that the law’s sanctioning of violence can best be explained through a more complex understanding of coverture – a doctrine that began not at the marital altar, as is usually claimed, but during courtship and whose effects persisted long after divorce and property reform dissolved the doctrine of marital unity. Thinking of coverture more as a constellation of ideas than as a block legal category allows us to more accurately assess its continuation at the very instance of its supposed dissolution.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"131 - 157"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1650629","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42623477","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1628631
A. Kettler
Abstract British colonial experiments within southern Africa worked to limit the influence of non-visual evidence used to prosecute witches. Relying on Western sensory legalism that focused primarily on sight, British officials distrusted Indigenous customs that indicted witches through non-visual means. Often, during medicine murder trials in Basutoland of the 1940s and 1950s, southern African legal questions of conjuring and divining therefore focused on rituals of smelling that diverged from Western sensory protocols. These debates on Indigenous legalism and remnants of colonialism remain vital in discussions of the AIDS epidemic, laws against witchcraft, and the application of specific senses and herbal curatives in modern South Africa.
{"title":"Smelling-Out Anachronism: Embodiment and Hegemony in the Medicine Murder Cases of Basutoland","authors":"A. Kettler","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1628631","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1628631","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract British colonial experiments within southern Africa worked to limit the influence of non-visual evidence used to prosecute witches. Relying on Western sensory legalism that focused primarily on sight, British officials distrusted Indigenous customs that indicted witches through non-visual means. Often, during medicine murder trials in Basutoland of the 1940s and 1950s, southern African legal questions of conjuring and divining therefore focused on rituals of smelling that diverged from Western sensory protocols. These debates on Indigenous legalism and remnants of colonialism remain vital in discussions of the AIDS epidemic, laws against witchcraft, and the application of specific senses and herbal curatives in modern South Africa.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"159 - 177"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1628631","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48299953","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-02DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2019.1649002
Lena Holzer
Abstract Registering a newborn’s gender/sex on the birth certificate is usually seen as a mere formality that reflects a natural state of affairs. This article, however, shows that the registration of gender/sex does something else than record naturally given sex differences in bodies; it actually produces and shapes bodies to develop in a way conformant with understandings of sexual dimorphism. Sexed bodies are therefore not pre-discursive and static objects, but they are constantly in the process of becoming, influenced by socio-legal procedures, including gender/sex registration. By analysing the effects of registering the legal gender/sex on birth certificates and the change of gender markers thereof in various jurisdictions, in particular Australian states and territories, the article aims to show how bodies of intersex as well as endosex cis and trans persons are made into what they are expected to be: sexually dimorphic. It concludes that legally assigning a gender/sex has intrinsically violent effects on bodies, something that could be avoided by eliminating the public registration of gender/sex.
{"title":"Sexually Dimorphic Bodies: A Production of Birth Certificates","authors":"Lena Holzer","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2019.1649002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2019.1649002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Registering a newborn’s gender/sex on the birth certificate is usually seen as a mere formality that reflects a natural state of affairs. This article, however, shows that the registration of gender/sex does something else than record naturally given sex differences in bodies; it actually produces and shapes bodies to develop in a way conformant with understandings of sexual dimorphism. Sexed bodies are therefore not pre-discursive and static objects, but they are constantly in the process of becoming, influenced by socio-legal procedures, including gender/sex registration. By analysing the effects of registering the legal gender/sex on birth certificates and the change of gender markers thereof in various jurisdictions, in particular Australian states and territories, the article aims to show how bodies of intersex as well as endosex cis and trans persons are made into what they are expected to be: sexually dimorphic. It concludes that legally assigning a gender/sex has intrinsically violent effects on bodies, something that could be avoided by eliminating the public registration of gender/sex.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"45 1","pages":"110 - 91"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2019-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2019.1649002","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42923939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2018.1504608
Madelaine Chiam, Sundhya Pahuja, James E K Parker
Abstract This article does two main things. First, it records and shares a methodology for running a writing workshop in the context of transnational doctoral and post-doctoral legal education. Second, it offers a critical reflection on this methodology, and in doing so draws out some more general lessons for thinking about our roles as scholars and teachers in the contemporary university. Our thesis is that the unusually formal, even stylised, structure of the writing workshops we describe not only offers participants an opportunity for detailed feedback on their work, but also helps to foster a certain ethics of scholarly conduct. This ethics emphasises the intimacy of scholarly relations on the one hand, and the importance of listening on the other. Such an ethics may be antithetical to some of the more insidious imperatives of the contemporary university.
{"title":"How to Run a Writing Workshop? On the Cultivation of Scholarly Ethics in ‘Global’ Legal Education","authors":"Madelaine Chiam, Sundhya Pahuja, James E K Parker","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2018.1504608","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2018.1504608","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article does two main things. First, it records and shares a methodology for running a writing workshop in the context of transnational doctoral and post-doctoral legal education. Second, it offers a critical reflection on this methodology, and in doing so draws out some more general lessons for thinking about our roles as scholars and teachers in the contemporary university. Our thesis is that the unusually formal, even stylised, structure of the writing workshops we describe not only offers participants an opportunity for detailed feedback on their work, but also helps to foster a certain ethics of scholarly conduct. This ethics emphasises the intimacy of scholarly relations on the one hand, and the importance of listening on the other. Such an ethics may be antithetical to some of the more insidious imperatives of the contemporary university.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"289 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2018.1504608","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41870641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2018-07-03DOI: 10.1080/13200968.2018.1526056
M. Iribarne, Nan Seuffert
In this article we analyse the regulation of female genital surgery in Australia with a focus on New South Wales. We argue that the categorisation of some surgeries as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and others as Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FGCS) participates in the production of a constellation of gendered legal subjects, produced in language and law, that contribute to maintaining the raced and gendered status quo in Australia. Our analysis demonstrates that there is not one legal subject (or object) position for women produced through these laws; a range of legal subject positions are produced in and through this specific set of legal provisions, and these subject positions may shift over time. We analyse three legal subjects, produced relationally. First, anti-FGM feminists and female parliamentarians, who, through campaigning for and participating in passing these laws, enter into a partnership across gender with male lawmakers, become authors of law and full legal subjects of western liberal democracies in that process. Necessary to the emergence of these women as full legal subjects and authors of the law are those subjected to these legal provisions. The creation and prohibition of the category of FGM, through the definition of a wide range of varying cultural practices of female genital cutting, or female circumcision, as ‘mutilation’, creates the image of the ‘mutilated (brown) female’ as subjected to the law. Finally, a new subject of FGCS also emerges through these laws: the figure of a relatively privileged (white) woman who is saturated with sexuality and defined through the decision to mutilate her body in the pursuit of sexual pleasure. This figure, which we call the ‘new hysteric’, is the third gendered legal subject that we discuss.
{"title":"Imagined Legal Subjects and the Regulation of Female Genital Surgery","authors":"M. Iribarne, Nan Seuffert","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2018.1526056","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2018.1526056","url":null,"abstract":"In this article we analyse the regulation of female genital surgery in Australia with a focus on New South Wales. We argue that the categorisation of some surgeries as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and others as Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery (FGCS) participates in the production of a constellation of gendered legal subjects, produced in language and law, that contribute to maintaining the raced and gendered status quo in Australia. Our analysis demonstrates that there is not one legal subject (or object) position for women produced through these laws; a range of legal subject positions are produced in and through this specific set of legal provisions, and these subject positions may shift over time. We analyse three legal subjects, produced relationally. First, anti-FGM feminists and female parliamentarians, who, through campaigning for and participating in passing these laws, enter into a partnership across gender with male lawmakers, become authors of law and full legal subjects of western liberal democracies in that process. Necessary to the emergence of these women as full legal subjects and authors of the law are those subjected to these legal provisions. The creation and prohibition of the category of FGM, through the definition of a wide range of varying cultural practices of female genital cutting, or female circumcision, as ‘mutilation’, creates the image of the ‘mutilated (brown) female’ as subjected to the law. Finally, a new subject of FGCS also emerges through these laws: the figure of a relatively privileged (white) woman who is saturated with sexuality and defined through the decision to mutilate her body in the pursuit of sexual pleasure. This figure, which we call the ‘new hysteric’, is the third gendered legal subject that we discuss.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"44 1","pages":"175 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2018-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13200968.2018.1526056","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44505380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：