What does gender equality need? Revisiting the formal and informal in feminist legal politics
What does gender equality need? Revisiting the formal and informal in feminist legal politics
复制标题
性别平等需要什么？
DOI：
10.1111/jols.12393
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
COOPER D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
COOPER D
本文探讨了在改革如何在英国法律中使用性和性别类别的政治冲突，专注于投机性的法律的建议，以“取消”性和性别。提出了三个相互关联的论点。首先，关于取消认证的不同观点都是关于并试图整理关于正式化及其失败的价值和风险的竞争观点。第二，理解这些观点，以及更普遍的去认证化，得益于将正式和非正式解释为（不）定居、（不）承认、系统（不）可理解性和（不）遵从的相互关联的运动，这些运动仍然无法还原为国家和法律的存在或不存在。第三，虽然正规化可以确定责任和权利，但它也可以解决不平等和排斥性的地位关系。在文章的最后一部分集中在积极行动，我认为如何运动的正规化和非正规化相互关联和可用的选择，在取消认证的条件下，如果积极行动是为了打击性别不平等。
This article explores the political conflict over reforming how sex and gender categories are used in British law, focusing on the speculative legal proposal to ‘decertify’ sex and gender. Three interconnected arguments are advanced. First, diverging views on decertification are both about and seek to marshal competing perspectives on the value and risks of formalization and its undoing. Second, understanding these views, and decertification more generally, benefits from an account of the formal and informal as interconnected movements of (un)settling, (un)acknowledgement, system (un)intelligibility, and (non‐)deference which remains irreducible to the presence or absence of state and law. Third, while formalization can pin down responsibilities and entitlements, it can also fix unequal and exclusionary status relationships. Focusing on positive action in the final part of the article, I consider how movements of formalization and informalization interrelate and the choices available, in conditions of decertification, if positive action is to counter gender inequality.