Abstract
Participants in the Feminist International Judgments Project have brought to a small group (a judgment-writing chamber) their individual feminist perspectives on international law, and sought to apply their knowledge and method to a highly collaborative judgment (re)writing process. In departing from academic convention and exploring the possibilities and limitations to be found in the collaboration and compromise of writing judgments (rather than focusing on individual viewpoints), participants have had their perspectives constantly challenges. In this paper I explain how this project has foregrounded shared experience in its methodology, thereby making an important connection between feminist theory and methodology. The practical challenges and solutions that participants faced in collaborating on their judgment-writing are also explored. Las participantes del Proyecto Internacional de Sentencias Feministas han aportado sus perspectivas feministas individuales sobre leyes internacionales a un pequeño grupo (una cámara de redacción de sentencias), y han procurado aplicar su conocimiento y métodos a un proceso muy colaborativo de reescritura de sentencias. Apartarse de las convenciones académicas y explorar las posibilidades y límites de la colaboración y el compromiso de escribir sentencias han supuesto un constante desafío a los puntos de vista personales de las participantes. En este artículo, explico cómo dicho proyecto ha traído a primer plano la experiencia compartida en metodología, creando una importante conexión entre teoría y metodología del feminismo. Asimismo, se explican los desafíos y las soluciones de tipo práctico que se encontraron las participantes.
Highlights
Concluding Thoughts: “much larger than just a collection of judgments”. This collection of rich and diverse essays demonstrates that feminist judgment projects have in recent years gained considerable attention, at least in legal feminist academic spheres, as a significant means of “doing law differently”
As well as venturing beyond the judgments of national courts, the Feminist International Judgments Project (FIJP) is unique for foregrounding in its methodology the question of collaboration
In this paper I have explored what contribution this approach might make to the feminist judgments model
Summary
The Feminist International Judgments Project (FIJP) first breathed life in 2014, when an international call for expressions of interest was circulated by coordinators, Troy Lavers and the author (both at the University of Leicester). The question of adopting effective and inventive methods and methodologies when approaching international law critically has been a crucial part of feminist efforts to disrupt and challenge the discipline’s normative foundations. Participants in the FIJP have brought to a small group (a judgment-writing chamber) their individual feminist perspectives on international law, and sought to apply their knowledge and method to a highly collaborative judgment (re)writing process. In departing from academic convention and exploring the possibilities and limitations to be found in the collaboration and compromise of writing judgments (rather than focusing on individual viewpoints), participants have had their perspectives constantly challenged. While I begin by setting our aims and hopes for the project, inevitably the collaborations have not been without challenges, and the problems that participants faced in collaborating on their judgment-writing – and the ways they overcome them – are explored. Through its focus on collaboration, we hope that this project has made a unique and important contribution to the methodology of feminist judgments projects
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
