Queering International Law: Possibilities, Alliances, Complicities, Risks
Queering International Law: Possibilities, Alliances, Complicities, Risks
复制标题
奇怪的国际法：可能性、联盟、共谋、风险
DOI：
10.1093/ejil/chy046
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
Arimatsu L
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Arimatsu L
这本书的“复杂性”部分以拉胡尔·拉奥的一篇文章开篇，他在文章中探讨了赎罪的意义，以更好地理解为什么英国的政治阶层更愿意承担殖民主义（反鸡奸法）的性不公正的责任，而不是种族犯罪（奴隶制）。国家应该为历史上的不公正赎罪的观点是一个相对较新的发展，引起了国际法律的学者之间的辩论。2 Rao的论文通过利用非法律资源，包括文学，心理学和政治理论，丰富了这一学术体系，揭示了与流行的信念相反，赎罪的表达往往旨在通过围绕时间性，代理和身份构建的索赔和反诉来限制或取代内疚。拉奥没有说明国际法如何参与形成每一项理由，因此错过了与在这一领域取得重要进展的国际人权倡导者进行毫无疑问是富有成效的对话的机会，尽管现有的国际法律的学说仍然不利于承认对历史错误行为的责任。[3]尽管如此，拉奥留给我们的是一个更加细致入微的理解，即赎罪，以及性和性别规范如何通过赎罪的表达来塑造身份和恢复等级关系，包括通过同性民族主义的主张。长期以来，批评学者一直有兴趣探索国际法通过身份的产生来强加秩序的多种方式，最明显的是性别和种族。第二篇文章的作者多丽丝·巴斯（Doris Buss）和布莱尔·卢瑟福（Blair Rutherford）以全球采矿业为案例研究，邀请我们将性行为视为一个这样的轴，沿着这个轴，法律构成了一个等级秩序（第36页）。对这一部门，特别是对手工和小规模采矿业进行监管的空前热潮，通常是通过将矿物非法贸易与以性暴力严重为特点的旷日持久的武装冲突联系起来的说法来辩解的，例如在刚果民主共和国的情况。巴斯和卢瑟福通过追踪性行为在多大程度上提供了一种“话语结构”，通过这种结构，
The Complicities section of the book opens with an article from Rahul Rao in which he explores the meaning of atonement to better understand why Britain’s political class is far more willing to embrace responsibility for sexual injustices of colonialism (anti-sodomy laws) as opposed to racial crimes (slavery). The view that states should atone for historical injustices is a relatively recent development that has prompted debate among international legal scholars. 2 Rao’s paper enriches this body of scholarship by drawing on non-legal resources including literature, psychology and political theory to reveal how, contrary to popular belief, expressions of atonement often aim to limit or displace guilt through claims and counter-claims around temporality, agency and the construction of identities. Rao stops short of demonstrating how international law is complicit in the formation of each of these grounds and, to that extent, misses an opportunity to enter into what would no doubt be a productive dialogue with international human rights advocates who have made important inroads in this area, notwithstanding the fact that existing international legal doctrine remains inimical towards recognizing responsibility for historical wrongdoings. 3 That said, Rao leaves us with a far more nuanced understanding of atonement and of how sexual and gender norms are deployed through expressions of atonement to shape identities and reinstate hierarchical relationships, including through homo-nationalist claims.Critical scholars have long taken an interest in exploring the manifold ways in which international law imposes order through the production of identities, most notably, gender and race. Using the global mining industry as a case study, the authors of the second article, Doris Buss and Blair Rutherford, invite us to consider sexuality as one such axis along which a hierarchical order is constituted by the law (at 36). The unprecedented rush to regulate the sector and, in particular, artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM), is commonly justified through narratives that link the illicit trade in minerals to protracted armed conflicts characterized by high levels of sexual violence, as in the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Buss and Rutherford advance a fresh perspective on the international regulation of ASM by tracing the extent to which sexuality provides one of the ‘discursive structures through which constructs of disorder