Women Judges: Judging Gender, Justifying Diversity

Dermot Feenan

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The under-representation of women in judicial office has led to callsfor greater female representation based on an argument that womenoffer a different voice from that of men. This argument has largelyfoundered, and a more recent rationale rests on the need for diversityin the judiciary. However, the disadvantage experienced by womenapplicants to judicial office is rooted in deeply entrenched structuraldiscrimination and exclusion, imbricated in the constitution of thejudge, judging, and judicial authority as male, masculine, white,heterosexual, able-bodied, and class-privileged. Arguments for widerrepresentation in judicial office need to address more effectively howthe judge, judging, and judicial authority are constituted. A survey ofwomen holders of judicial office in Northern Ireland confirms thisexclusion. While few respondents in the survey support the concept of adifferent voice, many identify distinctive approaches which canpotentially enrich notions of judging and judicial authority.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages490-519
    JournalJournal of Law and Society
    Volume35
    Issue number4
    Publication statusPublished - 2008

    Fingerprint

    gender
    judiciary
    constitution
    exclusion

    Cite this

    Feenan, Dermot. / Women Judges: Judging Gender, Justifying Diversity. In: Journal of Law and Society. 2008 ; Vol. 35, No. 4. pp. 490-519.
    @article{f40a2ec97fb24bf8878b063642840aee,
    title = "Women Judges: Judging Gender, Justifying Diversity",
    abstract = "The under-representation of women in judicial office has led to callsfor greater female representation based on an argument that womenoffer a different voice from that of men. This argument has largelyfoundered, and a more recent rationale rests on the need for diversityin the judiciary. However, the disadvantage experienced by womenapplicants to judicial office is rooted in deeply entrenched structuraldiscrimination and exclusion, imbricated in the constitution of thejudge, judging, and judicial authority as male, masculine, white,heterosexual, able-bodied, and class-privileged. Arguments for widerrepresentation in judicial office need to address more effectively howthe judge, judging, and judicial authority are constituted. A survey ofwomen holders of judicial office in Northern Ireland confirms thisexclusion. While few respondents in the survey support the concept of adifferent voice, many identify distinctive approaches which canpotentially enrich notions of judging and judicial authority.",
    author = "Dermot Feenan",
    year = "2008",
    language = "English",
    volume = "35",
    pages = "490--519",
    journal = "Journal of Law and Society",
    issn = "0263-323X",
    number = "4",

    }

    Women Judges: Judging Gender, Justifying Diversity. / Feenan, Dermot.

    In: Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2008, p. 490-519.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Women Judges: Judging Gender, Justifying Diversity

    AU - Feenan, Dermot

    PY - 2008

    Y1 - 2008

    N2 - The under-representation of women in judicial office has led to callsfor greater female representation based on an argument that womenoffer a different voice from that of men. This argument has largelyfoundered, and a more recent rationale rests on the need for diversityin the judiciary. However, the disadvantage experienced by womenapplicants to judicial office is rooted in deeply entrenched structuraldiscrimination and exclusion, imbricated in the constitution of thejudge, judging, and judicial authority as male, masculine, white,heterosexual, able-bodied, and class-privileged. Arguments for widerrepresentation in judicial office need to address more effectively howthe judge, judging, and judicial authority are constituted. A survey ofwomen holders of judicial office in Northern Ireland confirms thisexclusion. While few respondents in the survey support the concept of adifferent voice, many identify distinctive approaches which canpotentially enrich notions of judging and judicial authority.

    AB - The under-representation of women in judicial office has led to callsfor greater female representation based on an argument that womenoffer a different voice from that of men. This argument has largelyfoundered, and a more recent rationale rests on the need for diversityin the judiciary. However, the disadvantage experienced by womenapplicants to judicial office is rooted in deeply entrenched structuraldiscrimination and exclusion, imbricated in the constitution of thejudge, judging, and judicial authority as male, masculine, white,heterosexual, able-bodied, and class-privileged. Arguments for widerrepresentation in judicial office need to address more effectively howthe judge, judging, and judicial authority are constituted. A survey ofwomen holders of judicial office in Northern Ireland confirms thisexclusion. While few respondents in the survey support the concept of adifferent voice, many identify distinctive approaches which canpotentially enrich notions of judging and judicial authority.

    M3 - Article

    VL - 35

    SP - 490

    EP - 519

    JO - Journal of Law and Society

    T2 - Journal of Law and Society

    JF - Journal of Law and Society

    SN - 0263-323X

    IS - 4

    ER -