The Role of Stereotypes in the Forms of Complex Inequality: Some insights from the feminist critique of anti-discrimination law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52292/j.dsc.2022.2325Keywords:
Stereotypes, Serialization, Heterodesignation, IntersectionalityAbstract
This article presents a critical review of the existing literature on stereotypes, especially in the field of anti-discrimination law. After illustrating the two most common approaches, the so-called pejorative and the neutral-cognitive, it assesses some of their limits to deal with the phenomenon of structural inequality. Specifically, it will be argued that stereotypes as cognitive mechanisms are not aimed at obtaining information and their function is not neutral. A proposal is made to move the focus on the functioning of stereotypes, in order to identify the mechanisms that characterize them. From the perspective of the feminist critique of anti-discrimination law, it is proposed that stereotypes serve to justify power hierarchies and their operation is assessed through three key elements that define patriarchy as a power system: serialization, heterodesignation and finally intersectionality. To this end, reference will be made to the doctrinal approaches as well as to the case law from the two European Courts (ECtHR and CJEU).
Downloads
References
Alexander, L. (1992). What Makes Wrongful Discrimination Wrong? Biases, Preferences, Stereotypes, and Proxies, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 141, 149–219.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
Amorós, C., La gran diferencia y sus pequeñas consecuencias...para las luchas de las mujeres (4th ed.), Madrid: Cátedra.
Añón, M.J. (2020). Transformations in anti-discrimination law: progress against subordination, Revus. Journal for Constitutional Theory and Philosophy of Law. 27-43.
Añón, M. J. (2014). The Antidiscrimination Principle and the Determination of Disadvantages, The Age of Human Rights Journal, 2, 109-128.
Appiah, K. A. (2000). Stereotypes and the Shaping of Identity, California Law Review, 88, 41–54.
Arena, F. J. (2019). Algunos criterios metodológicos para evaluar la relevancia jurídica de los estereotipos, Derecho y Control (2), 11–44.
Arena, F. J. (2016) Los estereotipos normativos en la decisión judicial: Una exploración conceptual, Revista de Derecho de La Universidad Austral de Chile, 29(1), 51–75.
Barrère Unzueta, M.Á. (2018). Filosofía del Derecho Antidiscriminatorio, Anuario de Filosofía del Derecho, 11-42.
Barrère Unzueta, M. Á. (2008). Iusfeminismo y Derecho
Antidiscriminatorio: Hacia la Igualdad por la Discriminación en Mestre i Mestre, R. M. (Ed.), Mujeres, derechos, ciudadanías, Valencia, Tirant lo Blanch, 45–71.
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 Campos Rubio, A. y Barrère Unzueta, M. Á. (Eds.), Igualdad de oportunidades e igualdad de género: una relación a debate, Madrid, Dykinson, 143–160.
Cho, S., Crenshaw, K., & McCall, L. (2013). Toward a Field of Intersectionality Studies: Theory, Applications, and Praxis, Signs:
Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), 785–810.
Clérico, L. (2018). Hacía un análisis integral de estereotipos: desafiando la garantía estándar de imparcialidad, Revista de Derecho del Estado, 41, 67-96.
Condello, A. (2014). Il polimorfismo della generalizzazione nel diritto: una prospettiva filosofico-giuridica, Jus Civile, 5, 173-204.
Cook, R. J., & Cusack, S. (2012). Gender Stereotyping: Transnational Legal Perspectives. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color, Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299.
Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics, The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139–167.
De Hart, B (2009). Love Thy Neighbour: Family Reunification and the Rights of Insiders, European Journal of Migration and Law, 11, 235–252.
Dovidio, J. F., Hewstone, M., Glick, P., & Esses, V. M. (Eds.) (2010). The SAGE Handbook of Prejudice, Stereotyping and Discrimination, London: SAGE Publications.
Holtmaat, R. (2016). The Head of the Woman is the Man. The Failure to Address Gender Stereotypes in the Legal Procedures around the Dutch SGP, en Brems, E. y Timmer, A. (Eds.), Stereotypes and Human Rights Law, Intersentia, 143-173.
Holtmaat, R. (2010). De igual tratamiento a igual derecho, en D. Heim y E. Bodelón (Eds), Derecho, Género e Igualdad. Cambios en las estructuras jurídicas androcéntricas, Barcelona: Universitat Aut noma de Barcelona, 209-228.
Holtmaat, R. (2011). Article 5, en Freeman, M. A., Chinkin, Ch., Rudolf, B. (Eds.), The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women: A Commentary, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 141-168.
Kang, J., Bennett, M., Carbado, D., Casey, P., Dasgupta, N., Faigman, D., Godsil, R., Greenwald, A. G., Levinson, J. D., & Mnookin, J. (2012).
Implicit Bias in the Courtroom, UCLA Law Review, 59, 1124–1186.
Mackinnon, C. A. (1991). Reflections on Sex Equality under Law, Yale Law Journal, 100(5), 1281–1328.
Molina Petit, C. (2003). Género y poder desde sus metáforas. Apuntes para una topografía del patriarcado en Tubert, S. Fraisse, G., Nicholson, L. J., Campillo, N. y Molina Petit, C. (Eds.), Del sexo al género: los equívocos de un concepto, Madrid: Catedra, 123–160.
Molina Petit, C. (1994). Dialéctica feminista de la ilustración, Barcelona: Anthropos.
Morondo Taramundi, D. (2016). La interseccionalidad entre teoría del sujeto y perspectiva de análisis: algunos apuntes desde la teoría del derecho antidiscriminatorio en M. La Barbera & M. Cruells Lopez (Eds.), Igualdad de género y no discriminación en España: evolución, problemas y perspectivas, Madrid: Marcial Pons, 481–500.
Morondo Taramundi, D. (2014). Women’s oppression and face veil bans: A feminist assessment, en E. Brems (ed.), The experiences of face veil wearers in Europe and the law (pp. 218-231), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, J. A. (2014). The power of stereotyping and confirmation bias to overwhelm accurate assessment: the case of economics, gender, and risk aversion, Journal of Economic Methodology 21(3), 211-231.
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.
Render, M. (2010). Gender Rules, Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 22, 133–191.
Schauer, F. (2006). Profiles, probabilities, stereotypes, Cambridge: Belknap Press.
Staiano, F. (2013). Good mothers, bad mothers: Transnational mothering in the European court of human rights’ case law, European Journal of Migration and Law, 15(2), 155–182.
Stangor, C. (2000). Stereotypes and Prejudice: Essential Readings, Philadelphia: 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, 239–284.
Timmer, A. (2011). Towards an Anti-Stereotyping Approach for the European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Law Review, 11(4), 707-738.
Young, I. M. (1994). Gender as Seriality: Thinking about Women as a Social Collective, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 19(3), 713738.
Young, I. M. (2000). Justice and the Politics of Difference, 1990, Princeton: N.J., Princeton University Press, (Trad. cast. de Silvina Álvarez, La justicia y la política de la diferencia, Madrid: Cátedra).
Published
Versions
- 2024-08-31 (2)
- 2022-07-04 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Elena Ghidoni, Dolores Morondo Taramundi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Discusiones does not withhold rights of reproduction or copyright. Consequently, authors may share the final versions of publications.
