Browse by title

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items :

  • Family and Gender x
  • Law - Academic x
  • All accessible content x
Clear All
This content is available to you

Edited by Jill Vickers, Joan Grace and Cheryl N. Collier

This content is available to you

Edited by Jill Vickers, Joan Grace and Cheryl N. Collier

This content is available to you

Jill Vickers, Joan Grace and Cheryl N. Collier

In this Handbook a number of international gender scholars explore the third ‘wave’ of research about gender, diversity and federalism. It focuses on how institutions, ideas and practices affect, and are affected by, gender regimes as well as territorially and non-territorially organized diversities, including minority ethnicities, ‘race’, religious and sexual minorities. In recent decades, scholarship examining the intersections between gender, diversity and state architectures in federations progressed through several earlier ‘waves’. In the first wave, starting in the 1980s, feminist political scientists and legal scholars began exploring if federal systems were good or bad for women in reference to their ability to make claims against the state, usually coming to the unsatisfying conclusion that ‘it depends’. Most of these early inquiries referred to older federations, such as Australia and Canada. A second wave of gender/federalism research started around 2000. Building on earlier inquiries, feminist scholars of federalism explored if and how federal systems were gendered and what this means for women’s advocacy, organization and citizenship. But they often failed to recognize the changing natures of federations and how actors such as women’s movements can reshape architectural arrangements and institutional opportunities.

This content is available to you

Edited by Jill Vickers, Joan Grace and Cheryl N. Collier

This content is available to you

Hilary Charlesworth

This content is available to you

Kate Ogg and Susan Harris Rimmer

For feminist international law scholars, practitioners and advocates, the first two decades of the new Millennium have produced moments of elation and disenchantment. It has been the best and worst of times, in the truly Dickensian sense. With respect to international law victories for women, there have been successful campaigns to further entrench women’s rights in international and regional instruments. For example, in 2002 the Rome Statute came into force, which includes sexual violence in the definition of a crime against humanity. The Maputo Protocol on the Rights of Women in Africa and the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence came into force in 2003 and 2014 respectively. Women’s achievements in the international sphere have been recognised and celebrated: since the turn of this century, seven women have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for work relating to peace-building, democracy and human rights. International institutions have demonstrated greater awareness of and commitment to women’s rights and empowerment. This is perhaps best demonstrated by the United Nation’s (UN) eight resolutions on women, peace and security adopted between 2000 and 2015. Another institutional highlight was the creation of UN Women in 2010 – an organisation dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women. In some quarters of the academic community, there has been optimism about feminist international legal scholarship’s growth and potential for influence. Yet alongside these and other successes, the first two decades of the new millennium have also provided reasons for despair.

This content is available to you

Trudie Knijn and Manuela Naldini

This introductory chapter summarizes the book and puts in in the perspective of the extent to which EU citizenship is different for women and men, for the young and the old, for those who stay in their own country and for those who move within the European Union. It introduces diverse aspects of EU citizenship ranging among the political citizenship of young Europeans, the civil and social rights of migrant care workers, reproductive rights and variations in family law among member states, and EU gender politics and policies. It signals a remarkable and paradoxical tendency towards expanding the right to family life, exemplified by recognition of family diversity by the European Court for Human Rights and EU law, which have more recently substantially reduced the autonomy of national jurisdiction in not granting the right to family life to ‘other’ types of family forms, and the current process of increasing family dependency because of limited social citizenship rights for non-wage workers.

This content is available to you

Edited by Trudie Knijn and Manuela Naldini

This content is available to you

Bryan Sanderson

This content is available to you

Carlos Cavallé