Debra Liebowitz | Drew University (original) (raw)

Papers by Debra Liebowitz

Routledge eBooks, Jun 26, 2023

Women’s Studies Quarterly, 2002

Wendy Kolmar, with teaching guides by Caitlin Killian, Debra Liebowitz, Lynne Derbyshire, and Car... more Wendy Kolmar, with teaching guides by Caitlin Killian, Debra Liebowitz, Lynne Derbyshire, and Carot J. Pierman The most common and ubiquitous experience of film for women's studies students is the viewing of documentaries in core women's studies courses, particularly introductions to women's studies. Films and videos regularly supplement readings and discussion in introductory courses. Most women's studies faculty could make a long list of films used regularly in such courses, probably headed by Still Killing Us Softly and perhaps Rosie the Riveter While we as faculty are not unaware of the politics of representation and the complexities of taking such documentaries as transparent and nondistorting lenses into particular women's lives or experiences, we also understand the power of such films and videos to bring the faces, voices, and environments of their subjects into the classroom, especially for a generation of students raised, for the most part, in a highly ...

Cornell International Law Journal, 2014

As I stood in the international terminal of the Cancun, Mexico air-port on the afternoon of Septe... more As I stood in the international terminal of the Cancun, Mexico air-port on the afternoon of September 14, 2003, I was struck by how the scene epitomized the condition, complexity, and contradictions of the current debate on globalization. A buzz of energy filled every inch of the space as thousands of people — women and men of every colour, clothed in an incredible array of hues and styles — streamed into the airport following the collapse of the 146 nation World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations. Some of the people who had been inside the conference center just a few hours earlier knew that the negotiations had broken down and that delegates from a number of governments walked out as it became clear that core conflicts among them could not be resolved and consensus could not be reached. However, many inside the conference center, and the thousands of protestors kept out by the fortress-like fencing and the slews of police and military officers blanketing this tourist “Mecca”, h...

Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible ... more Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible for their actions and omissions with respect to gender violence. This Article traces the development of the due diligence obligation and analyzes how the United Nations, European, and Inter-American human rights systems interpret the due diligence principal in the guiding international documents and developing gender violence case law. On its face, the due diligence obligation calls on the State to take responsibility for preventing gender violence, prosecuting and punishing perpetrators, and protecting and providing redress for gender violence victims. The notion of State responsibility for gender violence offered by the due diligence obligation is foundational, and is appealing in many ways, particularly when considering the near-universal history of non-responsiveness to, State approval of, and all-too-frequent participation in gender violence. We argue that emerging interpretations of the due diligence obligation, as applied to gender violence, pay insufficient attention to the risks of State intervention. While State response is clearly needed, we should be cautious about the ramifications of the demand. A reflexive focus on State response can encourage an undue emphasis on criminal justice responses, with adverse consequences such as arrests of survivors and other unwanted interventions that thwart, rather than advance, fundamental human rights principles of safety, equality, and dignity. This focus risks situating the State as the entity charged with program delivery when other entities would be more effective. An appropriate model of state responsiveness should explicitly grant the State discretion not to respond, or to delegate its response to other stakeholders such as community members, survivors, NGOs, and advocates. It should consider the impact of any intervention on those at the margins— particularly those from racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities— and should take into account the experiences and recommendations of both advocates and survivors. A careful balancing of the need for State accountability with the risk of overintrusiveness can best advance foundational human rights principles, such as non-discrimination, equality, autonomy, and dignity, in service of ending gender violence and advancing justice.

Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible ... more Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible for their actions and omissions with respect to gender violence. This Article traces the development of the due diligence obligation and analyzes how the United Nations, European, and Inter-American human rights systems interpret the due diligence principal in the guiding international documents and developing gender violence case law. On its face, the due diligence obligation calls on the State to take responsibility for preventing gender violence, prosecuting and punishing perpetrators, and protecting and providing redress for gender violence victims. The notion of State responsibility for gender violence offered by the due diligence obligation is foundational, and is appealing in many ways, particularly when considering the near-universal history of non-responsiveness to, State approval of, and all-too-frequent participation in gender violence.
We argue that emerging interpretations of the due diligence obligation, as applied to gender violence, pay insufficient attention to the risks of State intervention. While State response is clearly needed, we should be cautious about the ramifications of the demand. A reflexive focus on State response can encourage an undue emphasis on criminal justice responses, with adverse consequences such as arrests of survivors and other unwanted interventions that thwart, rather than advance, fundamental human rights principles of safety, equality, and dignity. This focus risks situating the State as the entity charged with program delivery when other entities would be more effective. An appropriate model of state responsiveness should explicitly grant the State discretion not to respond, or to delegate its response to other stakeholders such as community members, survivors, NGOs, and advocates. It should consider the impact of any intervention on those at the margins— particularly those from racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities— and should take into account the experiences and recommendations of both advocates and survivors. A careful balancing of the need for State accountability with the risk of overintrusiveness can best advance foundational human rights principles, such as non-discrimination, equality, autonomy, and dignity, in service of ending gender violence and advancing justice.

International Studies Review, 2014

Global measurements have become foundational for understanding gender equality as well as for dir... more Global measurements have become foundational for understanding gender equality as well as for directing resources and policy development to address gendered inequalities. We argue in this article that attempts to quantify gender (in)equality globally have limited potential for successfully challenging gender hierarchies if compared to internationally agreed upon women's rights standards. To make this argument, we start by contrasting the general assumptions underlying the measurement approach with feminist scholarship on gender equality. Second, we examine nine key measures of global gender equality-the majority of which are produced by influential international organizations-and show that their focus on "countability" perpetuates a narrow and misleading understanding of gender (in)equality. Third, we present the CEDAW Convention and associated review process as an alternative to the measurement approach. The comparison highlights the need for evaluative tools that attend to the complexity and fluidity of gender norms and focus on context-specific agency to confront gender hierarchies.

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

Women and American Politics, 2003

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 2002

... For instance, organizations like Alt-WID (Alternative Women in Development) based in Washingt... more ... For instance, organizations like Alt-WID (Alternative Women in Development) based in Washington, DC worked in conjunction with groups like Women's Alternative Economic Network (WAEN) around issues of gender and the politics of economic integration. ...

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 2003

ABSTRACT This article does not have an abstract

Next year's allocation of panels depends on attendance at this year's panels. To ensure that the ... more Next year's allocation of panels depends on attendance at this year's panels. To ensure that the section can continue to provide a viable outlet for women and politics research, please be sure to attend the panels below. Friday, 7:00 -8:30 p.m., Reception in Hoover (Marriott Hotel) -Co-sponsored with the Women's Caucus SATURDAY, September 3

This has been another productive year for the section thanks to the hard work of many of our memb... more This has been another productive year for the section thanks to the hard work of many of our members. As program chair for the 2004-2005 meetings, Lee Ann Banaszak is putting together an exciting set of panels although our panel allocation continues to be relatively small. I am exploring various ways of addressing this problem. In the meanwhile given the importance of attendance to the allocation process, please be sure to attend at least two panels that are organized by Women and Politics at the next annual meetings.

Routledge eBooks, Jun 26, 2023

Women’s Studies Quarterly, 2002

Cornell International Law Journal, 2014

Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible ... more Human rights advocates increasingly invoke the due diligence standard to hold States responsible for their actions and omissions with respect to gender violence. This Article traces the development of the due diligence obligation and analyzes how the United Nations, European, and Inter-American human rights systems interpret the due diligence principal in the guiding international documents and developing gender violence case law. On its face, the due diligence obligation calls on the State to take responsibility for preventing gender violence, prosecuting and punishing perpetrators, and protecting and providing redress for gender violence victims. The notion of State responsibility for gender violence offered by the due diligence obligation is foundational, and is appealing in many ways, particularly when considering the near-universal history of non-responsiveness to, State approval of, and all-too-frequent participation in gender violence.
We argue that emerging interpretations of the due diligence obligation, as applied to gender violence, pay insufficient attention to the risks of State intervention. While State response is clearly needed, we should be cautious about the ramifications of the demand. A reflexive focus on State response can encourage an undue emphasis on criminal justice responses, with adverse consequences such as arrests of survivors and other unwanted interventions that thwart, rather than advance, fundamental human rights principles of safety, equality, and dignity. This focus risks situating the State as the entity charged with program delivery when other entities would be more effective. An appropriate model of state responsiveness should explicitly grant the State discretion not to respond, or to delegate its response to other stakeholders such as community members, survivors, NGOs, and advocates. It should consider the impact of any intervention on those at the margins— particularly those from racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities— and should take into account the experiences and recommendations of both advocates and survivors. A careful balancing of the need for State accountability with the risk of overintrusiveness can best advance foundational human rights principles, such as non-discrimination, equality, autonomy, and dignity, in service of ending gender violence and advancing justice.

International Studies Review, 2014

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000

Women and American Politics, 2003

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 2002

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 2003

ABSTRACT This article does not have an abstract