Collaboration as Feminist Methodology: Experiences from the Feminist International Judgments Project

Loveday Hodson

doi:10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-0998

Authors

Loveday Hodson University of Leicester

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-0998

Keywords:

Feminist methodology, feminist judgments, collaboration, international law

Abstract

Participants in the Feminist International Judgments Project have brought to a small group (a judgment-writing chamber) their individual feminist perspectives on international law, and sought to apply their knowledge and method to a highly collaborative judgment (re)writing process. In departing from academic convention and exploring the possibilities and limitations to be found in the collaboration and compromise of writing judgments (rather than focusing on individual viewpoints), participants have had their perspectives constantly challenges. In this paper I explain how this project has foregrounded shared experience in its methodology, thereby making an important connection between feminist theory and methodology. The practical challenges and solutions that participants faced in collaborating on their judgment-writing are also explored.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Views 384
Downloads:
PDF 205

References

Bernays, A., and Kaplan, J., 2004. Can this Collaboration be Saved?. In: D. Salwak, ed., Living with a Writer. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 142-145.

Binion, G., 1995. Human Rights: A Feminist Perspective. Human Rights Quarterly [online], 17 (3), 509-526. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/762391 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Buss, D., and Manji, A., eds., 2005. International Law: Modern Feminist Approaches. Portland, OR / London: Hart.

Charlesworth, H., 1993. Alienating Oscar? Feminist Analysis of International Law. Studies in Transnational Legal Policy [online], 25, 1-18. Available from: https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/stdtlp25&div=7&id=&page= [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Charlesworth, H., 1999. Feminist Methods in International Law. American Journal of International Law [online], 93 (2) 379-394. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/2997996 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Charlesworth, H., and Chinkin, C., 2000. The Boundaries of International Law: a Feminist Analysis. Manchester University Press.

Charlesworth, H., Chinkin, C., and Wright, S., 1991. Feminist Approaches to International Law. American Journal of International Law [online], 85 (4), 613-645. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2307/2203269 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Charlesworth, H., Chinkin, C., and Wright, S., 2005. Feminist Approaches to International Law: Reflections from another Century. In: D.E. Buss and A. Manji, eds., International Law: Modern Feminist Approaches. Oxford: Hart, 17-47.

Dallmeyer, D., 1993. Reconceiving Reality: Women and International Law. Washington, DC: American Society of International Law.

Eichler, M., 1997. Feminist Methodology. Current Sociology [online], 45 (2), 9-36. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001139297045002003 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Engle, K., 1992. International Human Rights and Feminism: When Discourses Meet. Michigan Journal of International Law [online], 13 (3), 517-610. Available from: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol13/iss3/1 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Fineman, M., and Zinsstag, E., eds., 2013. Feminist Perspectives on Transitional Justice: from International and Criminal to Alternative Forms of Justice. Cambridge: Intersentia.

Gilligan, C., 1990. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Reissue. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gunning, I., 1991-2. Arrogant Perception, World-Travelling and Multicultural Feminism: The Case of Female Genital Surgeries. Columbia Human Rights Law Review [online], 23 (2), 189-248. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10822/843439 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Hafernik, J.J., Messerschmitt, D.S., and Vandrick, S., 1997. Collaborative Research: Why and How? Educational Researcher [online], 26 (9-December), 31-35. Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1176273 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L., and Morton, M., 2001. Regimes of Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research: The Rigors of Reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry [online], 7 (3) 323-345. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177%2F107780040100700305 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Heathcote, G., 2012. The Law on the Use of Force: a Feminist Analysis. London: Routledge.

Heydon, J.D., 2013. Threats to Judicial Independence: the Enemy Within. Law Quarterly Review, 129 (2), 205-222.

Heyes, C.J., 1997. Anti-Essentialism in Practice: Carol Gilligan and Feminist Philosophy. Hypatia [online], 12 (3-summer), 142-163. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1997.tb00009.x [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Hunter, R., McGlynn, C., and Rackley E., eds., 2010. Feminist Judgments: from Theory to Practice. Oxford: Hart.

Kiefel, S., 2014. The Individual Judge. Australian Law Journal, vol. 88, 554-560.

Knop, K., 1993. Re/Statements: Feminism and State Sovereignty in International Law. Transnational Law and Contemporary Problems, 3 (2), 293-344.

Kouvo, S., and Pearson, Z., eds., 2011. Feminist Perspectives on International Law: Between Resistance and Compliance? Oxford: Hart.

MacKinnon, C.A., 2006. Are Women Human? And Other International Dialogues. Cambridge, MA / London: Harvard University Press.

McGuire, G.M., and Reger, J., 2003. Feminist Co-Mentoring: A Model for Academic Professional Development. NWSA Journal, 15 (1-spring), 54-72. Available from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4316944 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Meyersfeld, B.C., 2003-4. Reconceptualizing Domestic Violence in International Law. Albany Law Review, 67, 371-426.

Monk, J., Manning, P., and Denman, C., 2003. Working Together: Feminist Perspectives on Collaborative Research Action. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies [online], 2 (1), 91-106. Available from: https://www.acme-journal.org/index.php/acme/article/view/710 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Orford, A., 2002. Feminism, Imperialism and the Mission of International Law. Nordic Journal of International Law [online], 71 (2), 275-296. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1163/157181002761931387 [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Orford, A., 2007. Reading Humanitarian Intervention: Human Rights and the Use of Force in International Law. Cambridge University Press.

Otto, D., 2006. Lost in translation: Re-scripting the sexed subjects of international human rights law. In: A. Orford, ed., International Law and its Others. Cambridge University Press.

Otto, D., 2009. The Exile of Inclusion: Reflections on Gender Issues in International Law Over the Last Decade. Melbourne Journal of International Law [online], 10 (1), 11-26. Available from: http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbJIL/2009/2.html [Accessed 15 October 2018].

Rhoades, K., 2000. Collaboration and Collaborative Research. In: L. Code, ed., Encyclopedia of Feminist Theories. New York / London: Routledge, 96.

White, R.C.A., and Boussiakou, I., 2009. Separate Opinions in the European Court of Human Rights. Human Rights Law Review [online], 9 (1), 37-60. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngn033 [Accessed 15 October 2018].