Journal article Open Access

Feminist Judgment: A Commentary on Johnson v. Ramsden

Stauffer, Anna Elisa

MARC21 XML Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<record xmlns="">
  <controlfield tag="005">20220711134838.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="001">6625806</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="s">365123</subfield>
    <subfield code="z">md5:8684e47dc016de87c98df10972815f25</subfield>
    <subfield code="u"> Judgment – A Commentary on Johnson v. Ramsden_cognitio 2022_LGS.pdf</subfield>
  <datafield tag="542" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="l">open</subfield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">2022-07-11</subfield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="O">
    <subfield code="p">openaire</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">user-lory</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">user-lory_unilu</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">user-lory_unilu_rf</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">user-lory_unilu_rf_cog</subfield>
    <subfield code="o"></subfield>
  <datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="4">
    <subfield code="p">cognitio</subfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Stauffer, Anna Elisa</subfield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Feminist Judgment: A Commentary on Johnson v. Ramsden</subfield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">user-lory</subfield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">user-lory_unilu</subfield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">user-lory_unilu_rf</subfield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">user-lory_unilu_rf_cog</subfield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="u"></subfield>
    <subfield code="a">Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International</subfield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="7">
    <subfield code="a">cc-by</subfield>
    <subfield code="2"></subfield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">&lt;p&gt;The Feminist Judgment Projects are collaborations of hundreds of feminist jurists who reimagine and rewrite key judicial decisions from a feminist perspec- tive. Their aim is to reconsider judgments that have failed to address fundamental issues surrounding gender equality and sexual autonomy. In this article, after an introduction into the topic and methodology of Feminist Judgments, the relevant sections of the Australian judgment Johnson v. Ramsden [2019] WASC 84 are thus rewritten. The case concerned a woman who was pinched on the bottom by a stranger &amp;ndash; in this case a policeman &amp;ndash; during a group photo- graph at a charity event. The judge had maintained that the conduct in question does not amount to sexual harassment because a person&amp;rsquo;s bottom is not considered to be a private part of the body that is ultimately associated with sexuality. In the rewritten version, the development of sexual harassment and abuse within society as well as the role of the #MeToo movement and its meaning are considered. Finally, an outlook pleads for the introduction of feminist judgments in Switzerland.&lt;/p&gt;</subfield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="n">doi</subfield>
    <subfield code="i">isVersionOf</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">10.5281/zenodo.6625805</subfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">10.5281/zenodo.6625806</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">publication</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">article</subfield>
All versions This version
Views 7272
Downloads 3434
Data volume 12.4 MB12.4 MB
Unique views 6363
Unique downloads 2828


Cite as