Le réseau de recherche collaborative « Gender and Judging », lié à la Tulane University (New Orleans) propose régulièrement des pistes de lectures au croisement des recherches juridiques et du féminisme.
Il vient de diffuser une liste d’ouvrages récents sur son site internet.
On notera notamment l’ouvrage édité par Ulrike Schultz et Gisela Shaw, qui traite de l’importance à accorder au genre dans le fonctionnement de l’institution judiciaire. Voici le résumé de l’ouvrage, en anglais :
Does gender make a difference to the way the judiciary works and should work? Or, is gender blindness a built-in prerequisite of judicial objectivity? If gender does make a difference, how might this be defined? These are the key questions posed in this collection of essays by some 30 contributors from 18 countries around the world. The contributions draw on various theoretical approaches, including gender, feminist, and sociological theories. The book’s pressing topicality is underlined by the fact that, well into the modern era, male opposition to women’s admission to, and progress within, the judicial profession has been largely based on the argument that, because of their gender, women are naturally programmed to show empathy, partiality, and gendered prejudice – in short, essential qualities running directly counter to the need for judicial objectivity. It took until the last century for women to begin to break down such seemingly insurmountable barriers, yet there are a number of countries where even this first step is still waiting to happen. In all, there remains a more or less pronounced glass ceiling to women’s judicial careers. Gender and Judging will be essential reading for anyone interested in how gender effects the law. (Series: Onati International Series in Law and Society).
SCHULTZ, Ulrike et SHAW, Gisela, 2013. Gender and Judging, UK: Hart Publishing.