Stereotypes as mechanisms of inequality and alienation
A view from antidiscrimination law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1381Keywords:
Stereotypes, generalisations, heterodesignation, structural inequality, European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)Abstract
Stereotypes have received increasing attention in human rights legal scholarship as a form of discrimination. It has been noted that stereotypes imply generalizations that, in certain circumstances, obscure the subjects individually considered and, through a process of heterodesignation, essentialize their characteristics and behavior in a constitutive and regulatory way. Stereotypes are, therefore, the cause and consequence of a process of subordination that fixes the identities and status of disadvantaged groups. The discriminatory damage of stereotypes is associated, therefore, with the denial of the individuality and complexity of the subject, which can prevent the free exercise of autonomy and the access or guarantee of rights. This work examines these processes of heterodesignation and the collective dimensions of the damage from a structural perspective, through the analysis of a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads:
13(3)_Morondo_OSLS 524
XML_13(3)_Morondo_OSLS 553
References
Añón, M.J., 2014. The Antidiscrimination Principle and the Determination of Disadvantages. The Age of Human Rights Journal [en línea], 2, 109-128. Disponible en: https://revistaselectronicas.ujaen.es/index.php/TAHRJ/article/view/1406 [Acceso 23 enero 2023].
Añón, M.J., 2020. Transformations in anti-discrimination law: progress against subordination. Revus. Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law [en línea], 40, 27-43. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.5802 [Acceso 23 enero 2023]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/revus.5802
Arena, F.J., 2019. Algunos criterios metodológicos para evaluar la relevancia jurídica de los estereotipos. Derecho y control [en línea], 2, 11–44. Disponible en: https://perso.unifr.ch/derechopenal/assets/files/articulos/a_20190408_01.pdf [Acceso 23 enero 2023].
Barrère Unzueta, M.Á., 2014. El Derecho Antidiscriminatorio y sus límites. Especial referencia a la perspectiva iusfeminista. Lima: Grijley.
Barrère Unzueta, M.Á., y Morondo Taramundi, D., 2005. La difícil adaptación de la igualdad de oportunidades a la discriminación institucional: el asunto Gruber del TJCE. En: A. Campos Rubio y M.A. Barrère Unzueta, eds., Igualdad de oportunidades e igualdad de género: una relación a debate. Madrid: Dykinson, pp. 143-160.
Clérico, L., 2018. Hacia un análisis integral de estereotipos: desafiando a la garantía estándar de imparcialidad. Revista de Derecho del Estado [en línea], 41, 67-96. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.18601/01229893.n41.03 [Acceso 23 enero 2023]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18601/01229893.n41.03
Cook, R.J., y Cusack, S., 2010. Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives. Filadelfia: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812205923
Ghidoni, E., 2018. La esterilización forzada en intersecciones distintas: un enfoque estructural para el análisis de las desigualdades complejas. Cuadernos electrónicos de filosofía del derecho [en línea], 38, 102-122. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.7203/CEFD.38.12694 [Acceso 23 enero 2023]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7203/CEFD.38.12694
Ghidoni, E., y Morondo Taramundi, D., 2022. El papel de los estereotipos en las formas de la desigualdad compleja: algunos apuntes desde la teoría feminista del derecho antidiscriminatorio. Discusiones [en línea], 28(1). Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.52292/j.dsc.2022.2325 [Acceso 23 enero 2023]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52292/j.dsc.2022.2325
Holtmaat, H.M.T., 2011. Article 5. En: M.A. Freeman, C. Chinkin y B. Rudolf, eds., The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women: A Commentary. Oxford University Press, pp. 141-168.
Kang, J., et al., 2012. Implicit Bias in the Courtroom. UCLA Law Review [en línea], 59(1124), 1124–1186. Disponible en: https://www.uclalawreview.org/pdf/59-5-1.pdf [Acceso 23 enero 2023].
MacKinnon, C., 1991. Reflections on Sex Equality under Law. Yale Law Journal, 100(5), 1281–1328. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/796693
MacKinnon, C., 2013. Intersectionality as Method: A Note. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 1019-1030. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/669570
Morondo Taramundi, D., 2016. La interseccionalidad entre teoría del sujeto y perspectiva de análisis: algunos apuntes desde la teoría del derecho antidiscriminatorio. En: M.C. La Barbera y M. Cruells López, eds., Igualdad de género y no discriminación en España: evolución, problemas y perspectivas. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Políticos y Constitucionales, pp. 481-500.
Morondo Taramundi, D., 2021. Desigualdad compleja e interseccionalidad: ‘reventando las costuras’ del derecho antidiscriminatorio. En: D. Morondo Taramundi, C. de la Cruz Ayuso y E. La Spina, eds., Desigualdades complejas e interseccionalidad: Una revisión crítica. Madrid: Dykinson, pp. 11-28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1ks0g5w
Peroni, L., 2014. Religion and culture in the discourse of the European Court of Human Rights: the risks of stereotyping and naturalising. International Journal of Law in Context, 10(2), 195–221. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552314000032
Stangor, C., 2000. Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings. Londres: Psychology Press.
Timmer, A., 2015. Judging Stereotypes: What the European Court of Human Rights Can Borrow from American and Canadian Equal Protection Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 63(1), 239–284. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5131/AJCL.2015.0007
Young, I.M., 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Dolores Morondo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
OSLS strictly respects intellectual property rights and it is our policy that the author retains copyright, and articles are made available under a Creative Commons licence. The Creative Commons Non-Commercial Attribution No-Derivatives licence is our default licence, further details available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 If this is not acceptable to you, please contact us.
The non-exclusive permission you grant to us includes the rights to disseminate the bibliographic details of the article, including the abstract supplied by you, and to authorise others, including bibliographic databases, indexing and contents alerting services, to copy and communicate these details.
For information on how to share and store your own article at each stage of production from submission to final publication, please read our Self-Archiving and Sharing policy.
The Copyright Notice showing the author and co-authors, and the Creative Commons license will be displayed on the article, and you must agree to this as part of the submission process. Please ensure that all co-authors are properly attributed and that they understand and accept these terms.
