Women’s new servitudes in the age of freedom of choice

El orden neoliberal está imponiendo grandes transformaciones en las concepciones de subjetividad y en las instituciones legales y políticas. Sobre todo, está socavando la importancia de varios principios que son fundamentales para el derecho en general y para los derechos de las mujeres en particular. En efecto, la ideología neoliberal parece redefinir el principio de libertad, reduciéndolo a una simple libertad de elección y des¬mantelando el principio de igualdad a favor de un regreso a un régimen de desigualdad (legal, política y económica). En este ensayo, propongo reabrir la discusión sobre la libertad de las mujeres y su genealogía para comprender el hilo de continuidad que aún mantiene a las mujeres en una condición de servidumbre, lo que aparentemente se refuerza en el contexto del neoliberalismo.The neoliberal order is imposing epochal transformations on the conceptions of subjectivity and legal and political institutions. Moreover, it is severely undermining the relevance of several principles that are fundamental for law in general and for women’s rights in particular. Indeed, the neoliberal ideology seems to redefine the principle of freedom, reducing it to mere freedom of choice, and to dismantle the principle of equal¬ity in favour of a return to the regime of inequality (legal, political and economic). In this essay, I propose reopening the discussion on women’s freedom and its genealogy in order to understand the thread of continuity that still keeps women mostly in a condi¬tion of servitude, which is seemingly being reinforced in the context of neoliberalism

¿Bioética o biopolítica? Libertad y responsabilidad en una perspectiva de género (o en una perspectiva feminista)

Feminist bioethical reflection is notoriously rich and participatory. This essay does not propose a reconnaissance survey of the different positions that can be recognized and distinguished in it, but investigates, from the perspective of legal feminism, two pivotal principles that invest any discussion in the bioethical sphere: freedom and responsibility. The intention is to understand the currently existing relationship that currently exists between the genderized conceptions of these two principles, their neoliberal interpretations, and the instrumental use of women's bodies, which continues to be understood -expressed even legitimately, on a legal level- as a means of satisfying the needs of others and of governing populations. Bioethics and biopolitics, in this perspective, end up blurring and merging in the question of today's (neoliberal) articulations and transformations of power.La reflexión bioética feminista es notoriamente muy rica y participativa. Aquí no se ilustran las distintas posiciones que pueden ser reconocidas y distinguidas; más bien, desde la perspectiva del feminismo jurídico, se investigan dos principios fundamentales que influyen en cualquier debate en el ámbito bioético: la libertad y la responsabilidad. La intención es entender cuál es la relación que existe actualmente entre las concepciones de género de estos dos principios, sus interpretaciones neoliberales y el uso instrumental del cuerpo de la mujer, que sigue siendo entendido - y a menudo legítimamente, en el plano jurídico - como medio de satisfacción de las necesidades de otros y de gobierno de las poblaciones. Bioética y biopolítica, en esta perspectiva, terminan por confundirse y fundirse en la cuestión de las actuales (neoliberales) articulaciones y transformaciones del poder.La riflessione bioetica femminista è notoriamente molto ricca e partecipata. In questa sede non si propone una ricognizione delle diverse posizioni che in essa si possono riconoscere e distinguere, ma si indagano, nella prospettiva del femminismo giuridico, due principi cardine che investono ogni discussione nell’ambito bioetico: la libertà e la responsabilità. L’intento è di comprendere quale sia la relazione che sussiste attualmente tra le concezioni genderizzate di questi due principi, le loro interpretazioni neoliberali e l’uso strumentale del corpo delle donne, che continua ad essere inteso – e spesso anche legittimamente, sul piano giuridico - quale mezzo di soddisfazione delle esigenze altrui e di governo delle popolazioni. Bioetica e biopolitica, in questa prospettiva, finiscono per confondersi e fondersi nella questione delle odierne (neoliberali) articolazioni e trasformazioni del potere

Vulnerability: possible uses of a philosophical, legal, political and social concept

Nowadays, in the discourse of the social, legal, political and philosophical sciences, the term "vulnerability" is used more and more frequently with different, and sometimes even contradictory, meanings. This is even truer when political consequences are drawn from the definition of certain individuals or social groups as "vulnerable". In particular, one cannot forget that the term "vulnerability" assumes a stigmatizing and disciplining character when used in risk management studies in contemporary social policy, where the objective is the identification of the "most vulnerable" social groups, in order to adopt standardized assessment strategies and to implement measures aimed at limiting social costs through the creation of resilient individuals able to find first of all in themselves, thanks to the techniques of behaviorist psychology, the resources to reduce their "vulnerability". In the legal field, the category of "vulnerable subjects" or "weak subjects" appears in various sectors - criminal procedure, labor law, administrative law, etc. It is used to identify groups of people that supposedly require particular rules, procedures, and practices, because of their alleged "weakness". Many are the groups qualified by law as "weak" or "vulnerable". Within them there are people with very different characteristics, such as women, children, the disabled, and victims of violence. From the legal point of view these categorizations raise acute concern, because they involve directly fundamental legal concepts such as autonomy, equality, and self-determination. Given the extensive use of the "vulnerability" rhetoric in a wide range of disciplinary fields, it is important to understand and compare the most common conceptions of “vulnerability” in philosophical, legal, political and social language. This analysis will lead to a re-signification of the term, in order to separate the notion of "vulnerability" from stereotypes that tend to paint the socalled “vulnerable groups” or “vulnerable subjects” as victims. Framed in these terms, the term "vulnerability" opens up the possibility of a fruitful dialogue between theory and activism of historically marginalized and disadvantaged social groups, who are among the first to bear the costs of the austerity and welfare cuts of contemporary neoliberal policies, but who are also often the first to challenge their own qualification as "vulnerable". This edition has papers organized in three special sections about vulnerability: 1) The philosophical perspectives; 2) the philosophical - juridical debates; 3) the sociological perspectives

Diritti umani e soggetti vulnerabili. Violazioni, trasformazioni, aporie

Il volume intende indagare percorsi sviluppati su argomenti decisivi del dibattito filosofico-giuridico contemporaneo: la società multiculturale e i problemi dell'integrazione; l'articolarsi della differenza e le molteplici configurazioni della discriminazione; le inedite forme della schiavitù; le concezioni dell'eguaglianza, dell'autonomia e della solidarietà nei contesti dello Stato di diritto costituzionale e in quello della società cosiddetta "globale"; i controversi rapporti tra relativismo e universalismo; nonché l'articolazione di un pensiero normativo che, procedendo per argomenti, si innesta negli spazi, concreti, della vita sociale e istituzionale

Integration or Exclusion: Migrants in the European Union and United States An Historical-Philosophical Approach

The history of migration policy in Europe and United States between the late XIX and the early XX century offers several is sues of comparison with the current EU regulation. The paper analyzes, with a historical-philosophical approach, these two experiences with the main focus on the rights of migrants, whose extension has been determined by the legislations of both leaving and incoming countries, where the inclusion or exclusion strategies have been influenced by the opposite visions of the jus migrandi. After World War II the progress of human rights towards a full recognition both in state constitutions and in international treaties seemed to have achieved once and for all an unnegotiable and uncompressible standard. In the EU area the human rights legislation plays a crucial role, but at the same time the effort to create a new European identity has reinforced an exclusion process of migrants and a denial of their rights. New (or old?) political fears have once again moved the frontiers of the human rights back and EU citizenship risks to become the strategy of legal discrimination against migrants

Conclusions. Vulnerability and Strength: a Timeworn Pairing in Need of Reconsideration

none1The notion of vulnerability is extremely broad and has been interpreted in a variety of ways by different disciplinary spheres. This multiplicity of meanings and usages certainly represents a resource and attests to the indisputable theoretical and practical relevance of this term and of the vocabulary that has developed around it. Reflections on vulnerability would acquire greater utility if they were aimed at reconfiguring the proposal-generating capacity of this notion, not so much with a view to replacing significant principles such as equality but rather by drawing attention to the fact that some existing political institutions and legal institutions are already implicitly based on vulnerability. In this case, the reflection would be directed at proposing a sort of overturning of the paradigm. Thanks to this alternative perspective, in fact, we would be able to recover the "classic" positioning of the notion of vulnerability: namely, a key element of political and legal thought by virtue of its being an intrinsic feature of all human beings and, as such, highly relevant for the establishment of political institutions and the production of legislation, which in turn makes it an implicit "assumption" in contractarian and utilitarian philosophies. This change in outlook would inescapably lead to a new re-consideration of the issue of violence/force from a contemporary perspective, and therein lies what I see as the true significance of vulnerability.noneGiolo, OrsettaGiolo, Orsett

Il diritto neoliberale

La letteratura sul neoliberalismo ha indagato, nel corso degli ultimi decenni, molteplici aspetti relativamente alle trasformazioni dell’economia e della politica. Tuttavia sembra essere rimasto ai margini dell’analisi il rapporto esistente tra il neoliberalismo e il mutamento di paradigma che sta investendo il diritto. La transizione in corso ridefinisce le funzioni dei principi, la nozione di potere e di forza, la teoria della norma e dell’obbligo, la struttura degli ordinamenti e delle istituzioni, il ruolo dei giuristi, la soggettività giuridica. Essa appare, di conseguenza, particolarmente complessa e di portata epocale: il diritto sta mutando la sua natura, i suoi metodi, le sue funzioni. Obiettivo di questo volume è il tentativo di proporre una sistematizzazione dei principali problemi che attengono alle mutazioni che il diritto sta subendo, interpretandoli alla luce di quanto la progettualità neoliberale prevede e, spesso, impone