Abstract
AbstractIn this article I apply Fineman’s vulnerability thesis to explore the ways in which vulnerability is constructed and mobilised in a criminal law context. Using a ‘failure-to-protect’ offence as a case study reveals contemporary constructs of vulnerability as both a problem to be solved and gendered. Constructing women as pathologically vulnerable allows the state and its institutions to downplay the situational vulnerability of women, evading responsibility for tackling VAWG. Responsibilising women to manage risks to children posed by male violence requires that women undertake ‘safety work’, rendering them vulnerable to both moral and legal sanction if not performed adequately. Replacing the autonomous subject with the relationally vulnerable subject generates new understandings of the ways entwining femininity and vulnerability shores up the (male-coded) autonomous legal subject. Moreover, reconceiving vulnerability as universal reveals the potential of the vulnerable subject for a more inclusive criminal subject who is both embedded and embodied.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference112 articles.
1. Compulsory caregiving some thoughts on relational feminism, the ethics of care and omissions of liability;Cobb;Cambrian Law Review,2008
2. Too Drunk to Consent? Exploring the Contestations and Disruptions in Male-Focused Sexual Violence Prevention Interventions
3. Cracking the Foundational Myths: Independence, Autonomy and Self-Sufficiency;Fineman;American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and Law,2000
4. Zoora Shah: ‘An Unusual Woman’