Feminine Law
Olsen says, it may be that “Justice” is represented by a woman, but according to the prevailing patriarchal ideology, the Law is masculine, not feminine. As some feministic scholar states, the law is conceived as rational, objective, abstract and based on principles, which is how men describe themselves; and the law cannot be irrational, subjective, contextualized, or personalized, as men say that women are. If it is true that by placing men in the cultural setting, they become the parameter that defines humankind, how to organize the current law, which helps to incorporate the gender perspective into legal text or context? How to reform the curricular setting to be more feminine? Discuss.
Comments
However, I find that any theory that is based on one group versus another is prone to gross generalisations that are not helpful. Those generalisations also require that further generalisations be made in order to prove that a theme is in fact recurrent. To categorise the law as objective and rational (as opposed to subjective and sensitive) is to ignore the latitude that is provided in several laws such as those relating to sentencing in criminal trials. To categorise all men as rational and women as irrational is not only wrong but also quite offensive.
In sum, I think that it is worthwhile to take note of the fact that women as a group remain marginalised in the law-making process, and that the said process has suffered as a consequence. However, one cannot provide an a priori template to correct for the errors of man other than by ensuring that women are involved in the law-making process on an equal footing, and that the very nature of that process is critically assessed by persons of both genders.