Suchergebnisse

Feminist Perspectives on Ethics is a unique guide to the development of feminist thought on ethics and moral agency. Each chapter offers a survey of feminist debates on key areas: the nature of feminist ethics; intimate relationships; professional ethics; politics; sexual politics; abortion and reproductive choices. Importantly, the author draws on the range of ideological viewpoints that exist to demonstrate the rich diversity of feminism and also attempts to break down dualistic, discordant or simplistic understandings of ethics.

Offering a broad overview of what is being done in conflict-affected countries to advance women's participation in peace processes, peace building, and decision making, this record examines the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on "Women, Peace, and Security" and presents evidence-based case studies from East Timor, Fiji, and Sri Lanka. As it explores ways to protect women and girls from violence, it suggests key actions that should be taken by development agencies, women's nongovernmental organizations, and policymakers. The book focuses on the following fundamental aspects: a specifically feminist methodology, a priority on gender equality and women's empowerment, and the broad notions of human security and peace building.

As health policy at a national level has ever increasing impact on local health services, it is essential that public health students understand how the development and implementation of policy and strategy provide the framework for improving quality, innovation, productivity and prevention in the delivery of healthcare. The book is divided into two sections, with section one covering a strategic overview of national policies, and section two giving specific local implementation of policy examples to support section one. Case studies and examples will help the reader to understand the policy a

Visual politics are seeping into the technocracy. Rulemaking stakeholders—including agencies, the President, and members of the public—are deploying politically tinged visuals to push their agendas at every stage of high-stakes, often virulently controversial, rulemakings. These images, GIFs, and videos usually do not make it into the official rulemaking record, so this new "visual rulemaking" world has not been discussed much by scholars or others. In this article, we explore the new visual rulemaking culture that emerged in Obama's presidency, providing examples and discussing relevant policy implications. Although we recognize some risks, we argue that, on balance, visual rulemaking is a good thing because it can further transparency, accountability, and participation. Our article is adapted from a much longer one, Visual Rulemaking, 91 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1183-1278 (2016).

Federal rulemaking has traditionally been understood as a text-bound, technocratic process. However, as this Article is the first to uncover, rulemaking stakeholders—including agencies, the President, and members of the public—are now deploying politically tinged visuals to push their agendas at every stage of high-stakes, often virulently controversial, rulemakings. Rarely do these visual contributions appear in the official rulemaking record, which remains defined by dense text, lengthy cost-benefit analyses, and expert reports. Perhaps as a result, scholars have overlooked the phenomenon we identify here: the emergence of a visual rulemaking universe that is splashing images, GIFs, and videos across social media channels. While this new universe, which we call "visual rulemaking," might appear to be wholly distinct from the textual rulemaking universe on which administrative law has long focused, the two are not in fact separate. Visual politics are seeping into the technocracy. This Article argues that visual rulemaking is a good thing. It furthers fundamental regulatory values, including transparency and political accountability. It may also facilitate participation by more diverse stakeholders—not merely regulatory insiders who are well-equipped to navigate dense text. Yet we recognize that visual rulemaking poses risks. Visual appeals may undermine the expert-driven foundation of the regulatory state, and some uses may threaten or outright violate key legal doctrines, including the Administrative Procedure Act and longstanding prohibitions on agency lobbying and propaganda. Nonetheless, we conclude that administrative law theory and doctrine ultimately can and should welcome this robust new visual rulemaking culture.

In this Article, we examine the interplay of Rule 23(b)(2) class actions, feminism, and Title VII sex discrimination doctrine over the past fifty years to show that the theoretical concept of commonality—cohesion, unity—in the women's movement has had a significant impact on the ability of women to seek collective redress for workplace discrimination through class actions. We describe how the four "waves" of feminism since the 1960s find corresponding analogues in the development of Title VII class action law. Beginning in the civil rights era, feminism became an entrenched part of mainstream America Over time, however, feminism's influence waned as critics from within and without the movement attacked fundamental tensions inherent in the feminist project and as so-called identity politics fell out of fashion. [para] This is not an empirical study, nor is it comprehensive. Rather, our aim is to generate thought as to ways in which class action doctrine simultaneously reflects and reinforces evolving views of feminism and gender equality. We acknowledge that class actions are not the sole standard bearers for impact litigation, and that individual suits—whether brought by individuals of any gender or by physicians—have been vital to the establishment of anti-discrimination legal norms in the area of gender equality. Even so, we argue that Rule 23(b)(2) suits continue to serve a vital function by allowing women to enforce those established norms, overcoming classic barriers to judicial justice such as lack of resources, lack of access to lawyers, and retaliation by employers against individuals who file suit. As Anita Hill recently argued in a critique of the technology sector, "Class action lawsuits can force industry-wide change, even in the most entrenched, male-dominated industries."