Can feminism be thought of as a theory of law Essay

As a concept, feminism is very much a parvenue nonion at heart effective circles, which aims to eradicate two disfavor against wowork forces rights. This in a society strongly founded upon a antheral-orientated sound system, which historically fails to recognise the affectionate and legitimate rights of women, and preferably thinkes upon manful-orientated theories and ideologies.1 It is this patriarchy that womens liberationists boom to eliminate. The essence of patriarchy is emphasised by the redness levelheaded opening, positive by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 19th Century, which places no emphasis upon g send awayer, and consequently be teensys the feminists make do for gender equivalence. Juxtaposed with the uncompromising red approach to court- aubergeed detect is the postmodernistist dialect that offers a positive method of forcing individuals to confront and interpolate the rigid contexts and structures (including constabularys) within whic h they have arbitrarily confined themselves.2The political possibility of feminism is split into triple distinct categories, all of which work towards unmatched common goal of removing gender prejudices 1) Liberal feminism is grounded in serious music liberal thinking that individuals should be free to develop their own talents and enlist their own interests. Liberal feminists accept the basic organisation of our society moreover seek to expand the rights and opportunities of women. Liberal feminists support equal rights and oppose prejudice and discrimination that block the aspirations of women.3 2) Socialist feminism is an evolution from red ink conflict conjecture, essentially made in reaction to the little trouble Marx paid to gender. Socialist feminists argue that the button-down family must be restructured to end domestic slavery in prefer of more or less collective mover of carrying out housework and child c ar.The key to this goal, in turn, is a collectivized re volution that creates a state-centred economy operating to diddle the needs of all. much(prenominal) a basic trans word formation of society requires that women and men pursue their personal liberation together, or else than individually, as liberal feminists maintain.4 3) The third form of feminism is radical feminism. This, as the name suggests is the most extreme recital of feminism, it disregards the liberal theory as superficial and inadequate,5 and they claim that horizontal a socialist revolution would non end patriarchy.Radical feminists seek to create a society free from any gender discrepancy by completely abolishing the cultural notion of gender. To look at these three forms of feminism an observer would be ignorant to discard feminism as having no healthy influence, as it is assimilate to see from these that support for much(prenominal) movements is vast and comes in various forms, all of which attack the same enemy, patriarchy, albeit in differing manners. T hese differing methods atomic number 18 accentuated by recent developments and movements in society, particularly in the twentieth Century these can be clearly highlighted by looking at the actions of the suffragettes in 1910, which illustrate a more active approach to campaigning.As previously menti onenessd feminist legal theories are a contemporary concept, for this cause a radical new methodology in legal theory is required in order to encompass the new issues raised by feminism as a legal theory. much(prenominal) a new methodology could be found in the critical legal theory method, as it would be able to incorporate feminist views such as the theory that a phallic-orientated appreciation of legal philosophy emphasises individualism and rights at the write off of effeminate person emphases upon interaction and cooperation.6 This approach is however, solely a theoretic one, and as such it does not entirely cover the needs of feminism, yet as feminism is nevertheless part ially and peripherally concerned with academician theorising,7 the major part of the work of feminism is to promote the dissatisfactions of a wide spectrum of women, which highlight the general inequality felt by women in regards to legal and social equality.Therefore critical legal studies, instead of playing as a definition, are rather a useful gist of indicating the explicit and implicit male orientation of law and legal tribunal and the resulting disadvantage and marginalisation often suffered by women.8 This has led to the mention of three fundamental elements which live a feminist legal theory. These area) asking the woman question, i.e. the extent of the presence and recognition of womens experience in lawb) feminist practical reasoning, meaning a reasoning which proceeds from context and values difference and the experience of the unempowered andc) mind raising, meaning an exploration of the collective experience of women through a share-out of individual experiences. 9These three elements, outlined above by Katherine T. Bartlett, are designed to act as the source for coming(prenominal) feminist legal theory development, particularly in respect of womens outlook upon law with the intention of improving womens legal position in the future development or redevelopment of law.10The legal evolution, or, redevelopment, mentioned above is one in which women strive to see a revolution from an inherently male legal mind primed(p) implicitly discriminating against women because it is framed in cost of male experience which does not necessarily relate to that of women.11 That is to say, that in numerous situations women are expected to mirror full- era, long-term and unionised male workers, when in reality women digress from this norm insofar as their running(a) patterns tend to be far more interrupted and part-time.From this a clear paradox is produced, as feminists while thriving to be treated as the males equal simultaneously require a variant from t his norm in order to account for their differing responsibilities. This attitude is stressed distinctly by the remarks of Joanne Conaghan and Louise Chudleigh, when they say, tote law some(prenominal) embodies and conceals the gender division of labour and, by counseling exclusively on the world of paid work, ignores the differing responsibilities of men and women.12Such inadequacies within the legal system are numerous and ironically notwithstanding legal structures that aim to eradicate gender discrimination can be seen to be based upon analogies created from irrelevant, and sometimes outdated, male experience. An unmistakable example of this is the preaching of maternity leave as analogous to the sick leave of their male counterpart. This is coupled by the notion that parenting is predominantly the pistillates role, which is highlighted by the very limited provisions for paternity leave.13 The underlying worry here is that, in order to be treated fairly and without any pr ejudice women are required to meet a norm set by subsisting male experiences which by there very constitution do not create a balanced equality, and thus vivacious legal standards and concepts disadvantage women14 as they merely incorporate women into existing male-orientated legal structures, rather than recreating the legal structures so as to be found upon male and female requirements.The above mentioned relationship between female legal theory and critical legal studies creates a clear enhancement, in regards to political k outrightledge and understanding of feminists legal argument, and consequently for the female legal theory. The noticeable thing to emphasise from this is the disadvantaging effect of concealed and frequently unrealised turn in a legal order which has for the most part create from male rather than female experience,15 and has therefore produced a rather lopsided legal system in favour of men. This prejudice has now been identified, thanks to the relatio nship between critical legal studies and feminist legal theory, this identification can be perceived as a probatory legal stepping stone towards a legal system that not scarce incorporates females, but is instead founded upon female and male experiences resulting in an equality which is not merely all encompassing in terms of a male perspective, but rather an equality that is derived from the experiences of both genders.Strongly contrasting the fit nature of critical legal studies in relation to female legal theories, are those theories of law and society created by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Their creation, Marxism, a derivative of a much older proposition by Immanuel Kant that stated that, every thesis has a contrary antithesis16 and that eventual resolution of these two unconnected perspectives, through revolution, would end up creating an absolute understanding. This led to Marx placing ad hoc importance upon an economic foundation from which all things within society , both social and political, are merely superstructure.It is for this reason that Marxism has been described as being a distinctly materialistic theory. A strong contrast can be seen between the feminist legal theory, which bases its social beliefs at the apex of its legal structure, and the Marxist theory which states that social understanding is seen as an ideological learning of the economic relations existing at a given time which will deepen as the underlying economic relationships alter.17 present it is clear that a Marxist approach would place very little emphasis upon the social question of gender inequality, but would instead focus upon an economic foundation with the speculation that if a high enough harmonize of society feel a need to increase gender equality then a revolution would take place. For Marxism social revolution appears to be the basis for the theory to develop. It would therefore appear to be a theory that shows little appreciation for social needs, such as those displayed by the female legal theory.For feminists to advance their legal theory through a Marxist approach, the attitude of socialist feminists, as discussed above, would have to be adopted. That is to say that the bourgeois family must be restructured to end domestic slavery in favour of some collective means of carrying out housework and childcare. The key to this goal, in turn, is a socialist revolution that creates a state-centred economy operating to meet the needs of all. Such a basic transformation of society requires that women and men pursue their personal liberation together, rather than individually, as liberal feminists maintain.18 This once again highlights the idea of a union between both genders, encompassing experiences from both so as to enable females not only to be incorporated into an existing legal structure but instead to recreate a legal structure based upon the needs and experiences of both genders.A legal theory that promotes the liberating philoso phy required in order to create a society able to accept the alterations needed to adequately unify both genders in a legal sense is the postmodern legal theory. This theory, commonly portrayed as a recipe for relativism,19 in addition displays the characteristics needed in order to force individuals to confront and lurch the rigid contexts and structures (including laws) within which they have arbitrarily confined themselves.20 In this sense it is the ideal method for women to promote and execute the installation of their female legal theory. As it would not only tolerate an amendment in the law to integrate women into existing law, but more than this it would allow them to change the rigid contexts and structures mentioned above, which have prevented the advancement of gender equality within the legal structure.However, postcontemporaneousness also raises some problems in relation to feminist jurisprudence. Hilaire Barnett states that there must be developed critiques which rej ect the universalist, foundationalist, philosophical and political understanding offered by modernismand in its place there exists diversity, plurality, competing rationalities, competing perspectives and uncertainty as to the potentiality of theory.21 In general, here she is saying that women must resist generalising their condition within society, and instead focus upon the multiplicity of subjectivities, identities, which inhere in the individual.22Overall, I believe feminism to be undoubtedly fundamental in some way. The critical legal theory discussed above shows how society has failed to display mutuality, not only towards women as members of society but towards men and women, through an uncomely discriminatory selectivity, generate alienation and, ultimately, disfunctionality in the working of a legal order.23 This inequality has led to the recognition of three fundamental elements which personify a feminist legal theory. Resistance is however, met by a Marxist legal theory, which displays very little appreciation of gender issues. However, a feminist theory could be adopted through the Marxist bourgeois radical approach, which would see both genders uniting in a revolution to change the pre-adopted norms of society.This idea of changing preconceived rules and laws within society would allow a feminist legal theory to develop, an idea given weight to by the postmodern legal theory, which also places special emphasis upon withdrawing from a get together generalisation of women and instead focusing upon them as individuals. Therefore, I would argue that feminism can be thought of as a theory of law, albeit not on the same scale as other theories previously mentioned, such as Marxism. But its rapid evolution and recent political and legal enhancement within society makes it a theory with considerable weight, and certainly a theory fundamental in some way.1 schoolbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. whiteness2 textual matter on Jurispr udence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. whiten3 Sociology A Global Introduction keister J. Macionis and raft Plummer4 Sociology A Global Introduction John J. Macionis and Ken Plummer5 Resisting Patriarchy The Womens Movement and Feminism6 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White7 Dworkin, Which Dworkin? Taking Feminism disadvantageously in P. Fitzpatrick and A. Hunt, eds., Critical Legal Studies (Oxford Basil Blackwell, 1987), p.47.)8 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White9 Katherine T. Bartlett, womens rightist Legal Method (1970) 103 Harv L Rev, 82910 Katherine T. Bartlett, libber Legal Method (1970) 103 Harv L Rev, 82911 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White12 Women in Confinement potentiometer Labour Law Deliver the Goods? In Critical Legal Studies, p. 133 at p. 137.13 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White14 Feminist Legal Methods (1970) 103 Harv L Rev , p.829 at p.837.15 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White16 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White17 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White18 Sociology A Global Introduction John J. Macionis and Ken Plummer19 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White20 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White21 H. Barnett, Introduction to Feminist Theory (London Cavendish Publishers, 1998, p. 180.22 H. Barnett Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence, pp. 1179-8023 Textbook on Jurisprudence Hilaire McCoubrey and Nigel D. White