When Comparative Law Walks the Path of Anthropology: The Third Gender in Europe

IF 1.5 Q1 LAW
Stefano Osella
{"title":"When Comparative Law Walks the Path of Anthropology: The Third Gender in Europe","authors":"Stefano Osella","doi":"10.1017/glj.2022.65","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Gender recognition is a crucial achievement for non-binary people. To better understand this right, this article combines comparative law with theoretical insights from anthropology to offer a discussion of non-binary recognition in European fundamental rights law. It identifies three approaches to such a right and critically assesses each of them. The first approach is denial, with the non-binary option being explicitly or implicitly rejected, as has occurred in French and Italian courts. The next approach is limited recognition, whereby a non-binary option is granted under specific limitations, such as when certain physical characteristics are present or when a claimant permanently identifies with the non-binary gender. This is the course of action that has been taken in German law. The third approach is gender self-determination, whereby individuals can obtain recognition on the basis of their declaration alone. This solution has been offered by the Belgian Constitutional Court. On the strength of findings from anthropology, the article argues that the first two models are incapable of genuinely engaging with gender diversity, while the third one offers more robust legal protection. The analysis presented here serves as an example of how anthropological insights can be effectively used to advance comparative law research.","PeriodicalId":36303,"journal":{"name":"German Law Journal","volume":"23 1","pages":"920 - 942"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2022.65","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Gender recognition is a crucial achievement for non-binary people. To better understand this right, this article combines comparative law with theoretical insights from anthropology to offer a discussion of non-binary recognition in European fundamental rights law. It identifies three approaches to such a right and critically assesses each of them. The first approach is denial, with the non-binary option being explicitly or implicitly rejected, as has occurred in French and Italian courts. The next approach is limited recognition, whereby a non-binary option is granted under specific limitations, such as when certain physical characteristics are present or when a claimant permanently identifies with the non-binary gender. This is the course of action that has been taken in German law. The third approach is gender self-determination, whereby individuals can obtain recognition on the basis of their declaration alone. This solution has been offered by the Belgian Constitutional Court. On the strength of findings from anthropology, the article argues that the first two models are incapable of genuinely engaging with gender diversity, while the third one offers more robust legal protection. The analysis presented here serves as an example of how anthropological insights can be effectively used to advance comparative law research.
当比较法走上人类学的道路:欧洲的第三性别
摘要性别认同是非二元人群的一项重要成就。为了更好地理解这一权利,本文将比较法与人类学的理论见解相结合,对欧洲基本权利法中的非二元承认进行了探讨。它确定了实现这一权利的三种方法,并对每一种方法进行了批判性评估。第一种方法是否认,非二元选择被明确或隐含地拒绝,就像法国和意大利法院所发生的那样。下一种方法是有限承认,即在特定限制下授予非二元选择权,例如当存在某些身体特征时,或者当索赔人永久认同非二元性别时。这是德国法律所采取的行动。第三种方法是性别自决,个人可以仅凭其声明获得承认。比利时宪法法院提出了这一解决方案。根据人类学的研究结果,文章认为前两种模式无法真正参与性别多样性,而第三种模式提供了更有力的法律保护。这里的分析是一个例子,说明如何有效地利用人类学的见解来推进比较法研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
German Law Journal
German Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
75
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信