Critical Analytical Note

Home » Uncategorized » FEMINIST INHOUSE OPINION ON BREXIT

FEMINIST INHOUSE OPINION ON BREXIT

posts by email.

Critical Analytical Note: Critical Analytical Note

Legality of Hyperlinks

Legality of Hyperlinks

I, for one, while writing, picture the intended audience and the beneficiaries (wishful thinking). This article talks about the legality of hyperlinks, taking a leap from trademarks we jump to the next but a slightly tangled trajectory of Intellectual property Law. Copyrights are about ideas, they say ideas are bullet proof but with all my […]

Preliminary decree in partition suit and role of Commissioner

Preliminary decree in partition suit and role of Commissioner

In a partition suit, preliminary decree is passed. An execution petition is filed by the plaintiff before the court. Court allows for it and appoints a commissioner in furtherance of the same. However, objections are filed against the execution of the decree and for the recall of preliminary decree, by the defendant. Court allows for […]

Filing for trademark in India

Filing for trademark in India

In today’s materialistic world where intangible standards of quality such as the goodwill and the brand value of a certain product matter than the tangible quality of the product itself, when the common folk, the youth, dances to the tunes of wakhra swag shunning the idea of running after the brand tags but savagely contradicting […]

Material alterations to a Cheque

Material alterations to a Cheque

We received multiple requests to consider doing a post on material alterations to a Cheque than confining ourselves to just alterations in the signature. In this post we look at various issues that arise out of altering a Cheque…let’s get started! What constitutes material alteration of a Cheque once it has been signed? What changes […]

Cheque bounce Case (Altered presumption of acquittal by sessions court)

Cheque bounce Case (Altered presumption of acquittal by sessions court)

Now let’s alter the presumption. Presumption here is that Sessions court has acquitted the individual after he was convicted by the trial court. In case of acquittal by session court, section 378 of CrPC will come into play. Under sub-section 4, a private individual may by an application made to HC ask for grants special leave […]

Advertisements

An analysis of feminist writings on the internet and otherwise clearly indicates that according to them much of the Brexit hassle is basically due to the organizations run by white men in suits. This is based on the grounds that white men in suits run these institutions and had it been more inclusive, even in the system as binary as a remain or leave poll, outcome would have been something radically different. (Something that has not been elaborated upon!) To develop a better understanding the debate may be structured as having perhaps two essential contentions. The first contention is with respect to the lack of participation of women in the Brexit debate at large. Much of the feminist house is of the opinion that they have been not given the red carpet treatment they deserve and this has resulted in violation of their rights. Another essential aspect of this contention, as has been highlighted vividly by feminists is that multiple women leaders, including a female Labor MP, Jo Cox, have been harassed by men for their participation in the debate. They were harassed for tabling their views with respect to issue of immigration, austerity measures etc. As per media reports such harassments were made up of shouting popular counter slogans and logically sound assertions. (Feminists are of the view that this has seriously hampered the development of democracy!)

Second important contention is that Brexit will result in hampering interests of British women. This is reliant on the fact that EU has better protection laws for women in terms of equal pay, laws against discrimination on the basis of sex etc. However, equally strong argument exist on the opposition side. These include the arguments like the Suffragettes were not funded by the EU – It didn’t even exist when women got the vote under the Representation of the People Act 1918. It also had no part in subsequent amendments that led to women and men getting the suffrage on equal terms. The Divorce Reform Act 1969 widened the grounds for divorce to irretrievable breakdown, before the UK joined the EC. Another aspect of this debate includes the debate with respect to the economic implications. Feminists are of the opinion that Brexit will result in austerity measures that will disproportionately hurt women. Arguments within the feminist house against the stated included contribution to the research funds to encourage feminist objectives, access to the market and implications on pension funds if Brexit goes through.

Without commenting on the merits of the arguments, I’m personally of the opinion that this is another political debate, in simply another political ideology. Consequently arguments from both sides exist within the house and are perhaps logically consistent and sound. Further, outcome in this binary paradigm if stay or leave is also fairly determinable. Hence, we can safely conclude that while the defining parameters of debate have changed, outcome and structure essentially remains the same!

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: