Abstract
In the cases of Goodwin v. U.K.and I. v. U.K. the European Court of Human Rights held the U.K. Government to be in breach of Articles 8 and 12 of the European Convention for denying certain rights and entitlements, particularly the right to marry, to post-operative transsexuals. This article argues that although on some level these are welcome decisions, they are also conservative and recuperative in that they seek to shore up traditional binarist ideas of gender and sexuality. The article concludes, however, that the Court's conservatism is problematic in a number of ways; and that it may be most profitable to read these cases as an invitation to imagine further and more profound challenges to the old order.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Butler, J., “Melancholy Gender/Refused Identification”, in Constructing Masculinity, eds. M. Berger, B. Wallis and S. Watson (London: Routledge, 1995).
Cooper, D., Halley, J. and Eskridge, R., eds., Legal Recognition of Same-Sex Partnerships: A Study of National, European and International Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001).
Department for Education and Employment, Consultation Paper: Legislation Regarding Discrimination on Grounds of Transsexualism in Employment (London: Department for Education and Employment, 1998).
Department for Education and Employment, Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment): A Guide to the Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment): Regulations 1999 (London: Stationery Office, 1999).
Diduck, A., “A Family by any other Name... or StarbucksTM comes to England”, Journal of Law and Society 28/2 (2001), 290–310.
Foucault, M., “Technologies of the Self”, in Technologies of the Self, eds. L. Martin, H. Gutman and P. Hutton (London: Tavistock, 1988).
Foucault, M., “The Ethics of the Concern for Self as a Practice of Freedom” in Foucault Live: Collected Interviews, 1961–1984, ed. S. Lotringer (New York: Semiotext(e), 1996).
Home Office, Report of the Interdepartmental Working Group on Transsexual People (London: Home Office, 2000).
Lacan, J., Ecrits: A Selection (London: Tavistock, 1977).
Lord Chancellor's Department, Government Policy Regarding Transsexual People, available at http://www.lcd.gov.uk/constitution/transsex/policy.htm (2002).
Irigaray, L., Speculum of the Other Woman (Ithaca, NY: Cornell, 1985).
Mitchell, J. and Rose, J., Feminine Sexuality: Jacques Lacan and the ecole freudienne (London: Macmillan, 1982).
Morawa, A., “The 'Common European Approach', 'International Trends' and the Evolution of Human Rights Law”, German Law Journal 3/8 (2002), http://germanlaw-journal.com.
O'Donovan, K., “Marriage: A Sacred or Profane Love Machine?”, Feminist Legal Studies 1/1 (1993), 75–90.
Sandland, R., “Between 'Truth' and 'Difference': Poststructuralism, Law and the Power of Feminism”, Feminist Legal Studies 3/1 (1995), 3–47.
Sandland, R., “Seeing Double, Or, Why 'To Be or Not to Be' is (Not) the Question for Feminist Legal Studies”, Social and Legal Studies 7/3 (1998), 307–338.
Sandland, R., “Not 'Social Justice': The Housing Association, the Judges, the Tenant and his Lover”, Feminist Legal Studies 8/2 (2000), 227–239.
Sharpe, A., “English Transgender Law Reform and the Spectre of Corbett”, Feminist Legal Studies 10/1 (2002a), 65–89.
Sharpe, A., Transgender Jurisprudence: Dysphoric Bodies of Law (London: Cavendish, 2002b).
Slater, H, “Sex Discrimination and Transsexuals: Recent Developments”, Equal Opportunities Review 104 (2002), 15–19.
Whittle, S., Respect and Equality: Transsexual and Transgender Rights (London: Cavendish, 2002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sandland, R. Crossing and Not Crossing: Gender, Sexualityand Melancholy in the European Court of Human RightsChristine Goodwin v. United Kingdom(Application no. 28957/95) [2002] I.R.L.R. 664,[2002] 2 F.L.R. 487, [2002] 2 F.C.R. 577,(2002) 35 E.H.R.R. 18, 13 B.H.R.C. 120, (2002)67 B.M.L.R. 199, I v. United Kingdom(Application no. 25680/94) [2002] 2 F.L.R. 518, [2002] 2 F.C.R. 613 (ECHR). Feminist Legal Studies 11, 191–209 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025031126520
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025031126520