寻找一条更为离奇的法律:1976年的两个人民法庭

IF 0.8 Q2 LAW
Claerwen O’Hara
{"title":"寻找一条更为离奇的法律:1976年的两个人民法庭","authors":"Claerwen O’Hara","doi":"10.1080/13200968.2023.2184449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 1976, two people’s tribunals took place which considered issues relating to non-normative sexuality. ‘People’s tribunals’ are civil society initiatives that assert a popular jurisdiction which operates outside of both the state and international institutions. In Brussels, there was the International Tribunal on Crimes against Women, which treated ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ as a crime. On the other side of the world, in Sydney, there was the Tribunal on Homosexuals and Discrimination. These people’s tribunals are sometimes treated as forerunners to later developments relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) rights in international law. In this paper, by contrast, I engage in a queer reading of the Brussels and Sydney Tribunals, whereby I consider how the legal framings and procedures adopted by the two tribunals diverged from the LGBTI rights framework that would later develop. In doing so, my aim is to shine a light on alternative, queerer legal possibilities, as well as to open up a conversation about using people’s tribunals as a mode of queer activism into the future.","PeriodicalId":43532,"journal":{"name":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","volume":"49 1","pages":"17 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In Search of a Queerer Law: Two People’s Tribunals in 1976\",\"authors\":\"Claerwen O’Hara\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13200968.2023.2184449\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In 1976, two people’s tribunals took place which considered issues relating to non-normative sexuality. ‘People’s tribunals’ are civil society initiatives that assert a popular jurisdiction which operates outside of both the state and international institutions. In Brussels, there was the International Tribunal on Crimes against Women, which treated ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ as a crime. On the other side of the world, in Sydney, there was the Tribunal on Homosexuals and Discrimination. These people’s tribunals are sometimes treated as forerunners to later developments relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) rights in international law. In this paper, by contrast, I engage in a queer reading of the Brussels and Sydney Tribunals, whereby I consider how the legal framings and procedures adopted by the two tribunals diverged from the LGBTI rights framework that would later develop. In doing so, my aim is to shine a light on alternative, queerer legal possibilities, as well as to open up a conversation about using people’s tribunals as a mode of queer activism into the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Feminist Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"17 - 38\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Feminist Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2023.2184449\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Feminist Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13200968.2023.2184449","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

1976年,两个人民法庭审理了与非规范性性行为有关的问题。“人民法庭”是公民社会倡议,主张在国家和国际机构之外行使人民管辖权。在布鲁塞尔,有一个针对妇女犯罪的国际法庭,将“强制性异性恋”视为犯罪。在世界的另一边,在悉尼,有同性恋和歧视法庭。这些人民法庭有时被视为后来国际法中有关女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人和双性人(LGBTI)权利发展的先驱。相比之下,在本文中,我对布鲁塞尔和悉尼法庭进行了一种奇怪的解读,由此我考虑了这两个法庭采用的法律框架和程序如何与后来发展起来的LGBTI权利框架不同。通过这样做,我的目的是让人们看到另类的酷儿法律可能性,以及开启一场关于在未来使用人民法庭作为酷儿行动主义模式的对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In Search of a Queerer Law: Two People’s Tribunals in 1976
ABSTRACT In 1976, two people’s tribunals took place which considered issues relating to non-normative sexuality. ‘People’s tribunals’ are civil society initiatives that assert a popular jurisdiction which operates outside of both the state and international institutions. In Brussels, there was the International Tribunal on Crimes against Women, which treated ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ as a crime. On the other side of the world, in Sydney, there was the Tribunal on Homosexuals and Discrimination. These people’s tribunals are sometimes treated as forerunners to later developments relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) rights in international law. In this paper, by contrast, I engage in a queer reading of the Brussels and Sydney Tribunals, whereby I consider how the legal framings and procedures adopted by the two tribunals diverged from the LGBTI rights framework that would later develop. In doing so, my aim is to shine a light on alternative, queerer legal possibilities, as well as to open up a conversation about using people’s tribunals as a mode of queer activism into the future.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
40.00%
发文量
1
×
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