权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Reforming Legal Gender Identity: A Socio-Legal Evaluation

改革法定性别认同：社会法律评估

基本信息

批准号：
ES/P008968/1
负责人：
Davina Cooper
金额：
$ 73.87万
依托单位：
King's College London
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Research Grant
财政年份：
2018
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2018 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FP008968%2F1
关键词：
Reforming Legal Gender Identity Socio

项目摘要

Feminist activists and scholars have long questioned the idea that gender is a natural biological distinction, arguing instead that concepts of masculine and feminine, and what it means to be a man or woman, are socially generated. More recently, transgender and intersex activists and scholars have supplemented these claims, arguing that people's gender identities should not be restricted to the gender assigned at birth. As many people seek to live in ways that do not correspond to stereotypical notions of their gender or otherwise diverge from the gender assigned them, law, in different jurisdictions, has responded. Gender-neutral laws, procedures for gender transitioning and, most recently, legal decisions recognising the possibility of non-binary gender identities unsettle traditional legal regimes based on two, biologically fixed, socially differentiated genders.While reform initiatives internationally gain momentum, they tend to be limited in two key respects: first, they typically adopt an ad hoc or incremental approach to legal gender identity structures; second, they focus on legal accommodation of gender minorities rather than more general reform. At the same time, these legal and policy developments, the gender activism surrounding them (with all its internal disagreements, including over the meaning of biological sex), and the rapid upsurge of wider interest and concern about how to regulate and recognise gender identity have brought a more fundamental question to the surface: should gender remain a legal status assigned at birth; and what would be the implications of reforming this?Our project addresses this question. It critically assesses different options for reform and their complex implications for law, policy and NGO agendas, focusing on the legal jurisdiction of England & Wales, but drawing also on developments in Scotland and overseas. Research is organised into three consecutive work packages. The first draws on international developments and activist arguments to outline possible options for reform (for instance, birth certificates with more than two gender options; allowing people to choose a legal gender on maturity; or modes of regulation that are more like sexual orientation and religion which are not, for the most part, formal statuses in English law while still identifying protected equality grounds). The second work package explores the implications of different reform options. It focuses on what different options mean: for gender-differentiated provision, such as single-sex schools, domestic violence shelters, and women's groups; for diverse equality agendas including ethnic, religious and other equality grounds as well as transgender and women's equality; and for how gender is codified in law, including the key technical and administrative challenges new legislation would face. This second work package also explores public attitudes to reform, and what this can tell us about the significance of legal gender in everyday life. The final work package draws the research together to understand key points of disagreement and tension regarding reform; and to assess the best reform option for going forward. This recommendation will be elaborated as a draft Bill in light of the data and legal principles of "good reform" to emerge from the research.Adopting a multi-methods approach, research data include a public survey, documentary materials, audio-visual depictions of gender in practice, and interviews with NGOs, policy-makers, equality specialists, legal draftspeople, and wider public. Through meetings, workshops and production of a draft reform Bill, the project will actively engage stakeholders to participate in shaping and discussing research questions, analyses and conclusions, and finally to assess the project's methodology. Research findings, analysis and conclusions will also be disseminated through a book, articles, website, blog posts, presentations, social and mainstream media.

长期以来，女权主义活动家和学者一直质疑性别是一种自然的生物学差异的观点，认为男性和女性的概念以及成为男人或女人的意义是社会产生的。最近，跨性别和双性活动家和学者补充了这些主张，认为人们的性别认同不应该局限于出生时的性别。由于许多人寻求以不符合其性别陈规定型观念的方式生活，或以其他方式偏离分配给他们的性别，不同法域的法律对此作出了回应。性别中立的法律、性别转换程序以及最近承认非二元性别身份可能性的法律的决定动摇了基于两种生物固定的社会差异性别的传统法律的制度。虽然国际上的改革举措势头强劲，但它们往往在两个关键方面受到限制：首先，它们通常对法律的性别身份结构采取临时或渐进的方法;第二，它们侧重于对性别少数群体的法律的通融，而不是更普遍的改革。与此同时，这些法律的和政策的发展，围绕着它们的性别激进主义，（包括对生物性别的含义的内部分歧），以及对如何规范和承认性别认同的更广泛兴趣和关注的迅速高涨，使一个更根本的问题浮出水面：性别是否应该仍然是出生时赋予的法律的地位;改革会带来什么影响我们的项目解决了这个问题。它批判性地评估了改革的不同选择及其对法律、政策和非政府组织议程的复杂影响，重点是英格兰和威尔士的法律的管辖权，但也借鉴了苏格兰和海外的发展。研究分为三个连续的工作包。第一个借鉴了国际发展和活动家的论点，概述了改革的可能选择（例如，出生证上有两个以上的性别选项;允许人们在成熟时选择一个法律的性别;或者更像性取向和宗教的监管模式，在大多数情况下，这在英国法律中不是正式的地位，但仍然确定受保护的平等理由）。第二套工作方案探讨不同改革备选方案的影响。它侧重于不同的选择意味着什么：性别差异的规定，如单一性别学校，家庭暴力庇护所和妇女团体;各种平等议程，包括种族，宗教和其他平等理由以及变性人和妇女平等;以及如何将性别编入法律，包括新立法将面临的关键技术和行政挑战。这第二个工作包还探讨了公众对改革的态度，以及这可以告诉我们关于法律的性别在日常生活中的意义。最后的工作包将研究集中在一起，以了解关于改革的分歧和紧张的关键点;并评估向前推进的最佳改革选择。这项建议将根据研究得出的数据和“良好改革”的法律的原则，作为一项法案草案加以详细阐述，研究数据采用多种方法，包括公众调查、文献材料、实际性别问题视听资料、与非政府组织、决策者、平等问题专家、法律的起草人和广大公众的访谈。通过会议、讲习班和起草改革法案，该项目将积极吸引利益攸关方参与制定和讨论研究问题、分析和结论，并最终评估该项目的方法。研究结果、分析和结论还将通过一本书、文章、网站、博客文章、演讲、社交和主流媒体传播。