We exist, but who are we? Feminism and the power of sociological law

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Van Marle, Karin
dc.date.accessioned 2012-10-22T06:48:20Z
dc.date.available 2012-10-22T06:48:20Z
dc.date.issued 2012-08
dc.description.abstract In this article the author revisits Carol Smart’s 1989 publication Feminism and the power of law. She engages with Smart’s main claims by way of a number of other thinkers. Following Marianne Constable’s description of contemporary American legal thought as socio-legal, the author tentatively considers if it could be argued that some strains in contemporary legal feminism that adopted a sociological method resulted in a similar absence of justice that concerns Constable. Smart’s caution against the development of a feminist jurisprudence is critically analysed with the benefit of hindsight. Drawing on Deleuze and Guattari, Foucault and Goodrich, the author tentatively considers the becoming of a feminist jurisprudence as a minor jurisprudence. en_US
dc.description.uri http://www.springerlink.com/content/104213/ en_US
dc.identifier.citation Van Marle, K 2012, 'We exist, but who are we? Feminism and the power of sociological law', Feminist Legal Studies, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 149-159, doi: 10.1007/s10691-012-9205-x. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0966-3622 (print)
dc.identifier.issn 1572-8455 (online)
dc.identifier.other 10.1007/s10691-012-9205-x
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2263/20246
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Springer en_US
dc.rights © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012. The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com. en_US
dc.subject Sociological method en_US
dc.subject Absence of justice en_US
dc.subject Ethics of discomfort en_US
dc.subject Minor jurisprudence en_US
dc.title We exist, but who are we? Feminism and the power of sociological law en_US
dc.type Postprint Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record