|
|
||
|
Required Texts:
Cynthia Grant Bowman, Laura A. Rosenbury, Deborah Tuerkheimer & Kimberly A. Yuracko, Feminist Jurisprudence: Cases and Materials (4th ed. 2010); Supplemental Materials (designated as Supp. in syllabus - hyperlink); and Nancy Levit & Robert R.M. Verchick, Feminist Legal Theory: A Primer (New York University Press 2006) (designated as FLT in syllabus) Representative examples from prior final examinations and answer keys may be found on the web at http://www1.law.umkc.edu/faculty/levit/Gender&Justice/Index.htm | ||
|
No audio or video recording of this class is allowed, except by authorization under Section 240.040 of the Collected Rules and Regulations. Assignments: |
||
| 1. Introduction and Historical Background | pp. 1-16 | |
| Constitutional Equality and the ERA | pp. 17-25 | |
| Feminism and Law | FLT pp. 1-7 | |
| Barbara Ehrenreich, Why We Lost the ERA | Supp. | |
| 2. Constitutional Standard | pp. 25-45 | |
| California Federal Savings & Loan v. Guerra | FLT p. 21 | |
| United States v. Virginia | pp. 68-80 | |
| Single-Sex Education | FLT pp. 92-98 | |
| Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation: | ||
| Equality Foundation v. City of Cincinnati | Supp. | |
| Lawrence v. Texas | Supp. | |
| Human Rights Campaign, Marriage Equality and Relationship Recognition Laws http://www.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/Relationship_Recognition_Laws_Map.pdf | ||
| 3. Feminist Theory | ||
| Varieties of Contemporary Feminist Legal Theory | FLT pp. 8-16 | |
| Methodology | pp. 96-102 | |
| FLT pp. 45-54 | ||
| Difference Theory (Carol Gilligan) | pp. 103-106 | |
| Cultural Feminism | FLT pp. 18-22 | |
| Dominance or Inequality Theory (Radical Feminism) | pp. 119-129 | |
| FLT pp. 22-26 | ||
| Formal Equality (Sameness) Theory | pp. 115-119 | |
| FLT pp. 16-18 | ||
| Relational Feminism (Difference Theory II) | pp. 132-144 | |
| Anti-Essentialism | pp. 150-65 | |
| Lesbian Feminism | ||
| Critical Race Feminism | pp. 165-70 | |
| Notes 173-76 | ||
| FLT pp. 26-31 | ||
| Rosin, The End of Men | ||
| 4. Intimate Violence I: Intimate Partner Violence |
pp. 214-217 pp. 238 (bottom)-242 |
|
| FLT pp. 179-181 | ||
| FLT pp. 189-202 | ||
| The Battered Woman: Learned Helplessness and Survivor Theories | pp. 242-254 | |
| The Constitution and Police Response | pp. 261-269 | |
| Battered Women Who Kill Their Abusers | pp. 226-238 | |
| The Debate Over Mandatory Prosecution | pp. 269-281 | |
| The Violence Against Women Act | pp. 281-285 | |
| (Documentary in class: Defending Our Lives) | ||
| 5. Intimate Violence II: Rape | pp. 293-317 | |
| Marital Rape | pp. 317-322 | |
| Todd Akin, “Legitimate Rape” Victims Rarely Get Pregnant http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2012/08/todd-akin-legitimate-rape-victims-rarely-get-pregnant.html | ||
|
Todd K. Shackelford & Gregory J. LeBlanc Courageous, Compassionate, and Scholarly |
Supp. | |
| Hilary Rose, Debating Rape | Supp. | |
| Objectivity, She Said | Supp. | |
| 6. Reproduction | ||
| Birth Control | pp. 402-413 | |
| FLT pp. 145-148 | ||
| Abortion | pp. 419-63 | |
| FLT pp. 128-140 | ||
| Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England | Supp. | |
| Oklahoma and South Dakota Informed Consent Statutes | Supp. | |
| Missouri Laws Regarding Abortion http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/government-and-you/state-governments/state-profiles/missouri.html | ||
| Lawsuit Challenges Georgia Abortion Ban http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/aclu-files-lawsuit-challenging-georgia-abortion-ban | ||
| Voices Brief, Amicus Brief of the National Council of Negro Women, and Brief of Women Injured by Abortion | pp. 463-471 | |
| 7. Intimate Relationships | ||
| Heterosexual Marriage, Power & the Politics of Housework | pp. 548-569 | |
| Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships | pp. 569-601 | |
| FLT pp. 163-168 | ||
| Childrearing | pp. 633-36 | |
| Note 11, p. 643 | ||
| Lesbian and Gay Parents | pp. 644-653 | |
| The Family and Medical Leave Act | pp. 654-662 | |
| Parenting Leave | Notes, pp. 670-672 | |
| pp. 673-681 | ||
| Custody of Children |
pp. 729-737
Notes 5-6, pp. 745-746 |
|
| Child Support |
pp. 746-754
Note 11, pp. 756-57 |
|
| 8. Gender in the Workplace I | ||
| The Model Worker | pp. 847-50 | |
| FLT pp. 57-61 | ||
| Maternity Leave and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act | pp. 850-863 | |
| FLT pp. 61-63 | ||
| Sexual Harassment | pp. 880-900 | |
| Nelson v. Knight | ||
| FLT pp. 66-73 | ||
| Employer Liability | pp. 906-912 | |
| 9. Gender in the Workplace II | ||
| Sexuality, Stereotyping, Femininity & Professional Appearance | pp. 912-922 | |
| Jespersen v. Harrah’s | Supp. | |
| “Too Hot for Citibank?” http://www.villagevoice.com/slideshow/too-hot-for-citibank--30014985/ | ||
| Intersection of Race and Sex | pp. 929-top of 931 | |
| pp. 938-942 up to note 9 | ||
| “Choice” and Equal Work | Supp. | |
| FLT pp. 63-66 | ||
| 10. Pornography | pp. 373-383 | |
| Anti-Pornography Ordinance | pp. 383-386 | |
| American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut | pp. 387-392 | |
| Mock moot court exercise | ||
| 11. Gender and the Legal Profession | ||
| Introduction | pp. 961-964 | |
| Women and Legal Education | pp. 964-979 | |
| Bias Against Women as Attorneys | pp. 979-986 | |
| Catalyst, Women in Law in the U.S. July 2012 http://www.catalyst.org/publication/246/women-in-law-in-the-us | ||
| Notes pp. 989-994 | ||
| 12. Gender Differences in Perception and Language [if time permits] | ||
| Cross-Gender Conversations | No readings | |
| Tape in class of Robert Bly and Deborah Tannen | ||
| 13. Global Feminism and Equality | pp. 1035-1045 | |
| Barbara Stark, Women, Globalization, and Law | Supp. | |
| FLT pp. 212-227 | ||
| 14. Gender and Popular Culture | Your materials | |
| Susan J. Douglas, Where the Girls Are: Growing Up Female with the Mass Media | Supp. | |
|
The Lawyer in Popular Culture: A Bibliography (optional reading) http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/exhibits/lpop/documents/bibliography_2011.pdf |
||
|
Student Responsibilities Each student is required to: 1. Attend seminar class sessions and participate in discussion. You may ask to “fly free”(attend class but not participate) twice during the semester. Otherwise, please come to class having read the day’s assignment and be prepared to be called on. See criteria below for assessment of class participation. 2. Submit a two-page experiential paper by Thursday, March 7, 2013. The experiential paper seeks your reaction to any social, cultural, or political event as an experience about gender. In the past, students have described the gendering in events ranging from viewing movies (“The First Wives Club, ” “Thelma and Louise”) or plays (“The Vagina Monologues,” “Oleanna”) to attending a men’s movement group meeting (mythopoetic, Promise Keepers, profeminist, men’s rights), a political caucus, or a seminar to obtain a home loan. The purposes of the paper are (1) to encourage you to seek knowledge about gender outside the walls of the law school, and (2) to make gender visible in everyday life. This paper will not be graded separately, but the quality of the experiential paper will factor in to my consideration of class participation grades. If the paper is late, your overall grade for the class will be reduced by one half grade. The paper may be no more than two pages. 3. Bring in something from the mass media—a newspaper article, cartoon, song, magazine advertisement, photograph, etc.—on the last two days of class (be ready for either day), to share with the class. Be prepared to introduce your material to the class and lead a five-ten minute class discussion of your material. Please tell me your topic by Tuesday, March 19, 2013. 4. Take a final exam or write a 20 page analytical (not merely descriptive) paper, which will constitute between 75%-100% of your grade. Class participation will constitute between 0-25% of your grade. If I cannot meaningfully distinguish among all class participants, I will choose to have your exam or paper comprise the entire grade. I do reserve the right to bump students up for exceptional class performance and to reduce grades for lack of preparation. The following evaluation factors are intended to encourage you to make each seminar session a valuable experience for you and your classmates: 1. Your ability to analytically evaluate and use the assigned readings to enhance discussion—Do the comments exhibit reflection about the material assigned (vs. “top of the head” comments)? Does your discussion demonstrate that you have studied the reading material both receptively and critically: Does it show that you have been willing to accept (at least tentatively) the author’s assumptions and values and to recreate the thought process that led the author from those assumptions and values to the his or her conclusions? Does it show that you have then rigorously—but fairly—tested the author’s assumptions against objective data (including your own experience), decided whether the author’s values are morally acceptable to you, and evaluated whether the article’s arguments rationally leads from author’s assumptions and values to his or her conclusions? 2. Your ability to relate the readings to real life experiences (your own or others’)—Are the comments anchored in the material for the day? 3. Your spontaneous responses to questions and comments from other students—Is there an effort to make the comments connect to the flow of the conversation? 4. Your ability to defend your viewpoints and your openness to considering and exploring alternative points of view—Do the comments indicate a willingness to suspend judgment, possibly modify positions, and tolerate diverse views? 5. Is the comment concise, cogent, original, and to the point? This is the “don’t talk just to hear yourself or take up airtime” category. Uninformed pontificating or musing will not count as a contribution to class discussion. 6. All students are expected to act with professional respect for others. 7. Class participation will be an integral part of this course. Daily attendance counts, but regular class attendance by itself does not constitute good class participation revised 01/17/2013 |
||