Moving the margins.

• Author: Rivera, Jenny
• Position: Duty to recognize and respond to social needs - Why a Feminist Law Journal?

Thank you to the symposium organizers for inviting me to speak. The symposium theme, a n exploration of the justification and need for a feminist law journal, and the panel I participated in focusing on the concept of marginalization, strike me as familiar and somewhat heavily-explored areas of discourse. Surely when the founders of the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law ("JGL") proposed this scholarly endeavor, there were those who questioned the need for such a publication. While those early doubters probably included those who challenged the concept of sex discrimination, as well as the need for remediation, I assume there were those who genuinely wondered what role JGL could play in the development of feminist legal theory and discourse. As such, it is not merely an academic exercise to revisit this question of JGL's relevance, but rather an important stage of the development of feminist doctrine and feminism itself.

My answer to the question "Why a feminist law journal?" is simply "Why not?" My response is not intended to trivialize or avoid the underlying concerns of our inquiry, but rather to elevate what I consider the critical issue behind the inquiry. In my opinion, to ask "Why a feminist law journal?" is to ask "Why is feminism important? Why is feminism relevant to today's world? Why does anyone still consider it important to focus closely on the status of women and on gender issues?" Our panel, "Moving the Margins," similarly leads to several important questions. Due to limited time, I will focus on how a feminist law journal can serve as a "mover" in its own right and as a facilitator of "movers."

In considering these questions--which represent the underlying challenge to the validity and need for such a journal, and which are inherent in the "Why a feminist law journal?" inquiry--I suggest that we have validly shifted the inquiry to the proper source of concern. If the justification for JGL was adequately articulated at its founding, then to now ask "Why?" is to suggest that changed circumstances have put into question the original justification. My response "Why not?" focuses our thinking on whether circumstances have sufficiently changed to warrant a rejection of the original justification, unless some new justification can support its continued existence.

In every issue, JGL states that it seeks "to address the interplay between gender and law and its effects at the personal, community, national, and international levels. Our articles express an expansive view of feminism and of feminist jurisprudence, embracing issues related to women and men of all races, ethnicities, classes, sexual orientations, and cultures." (1) Moreover, JGL states that its goal "is to advance feminist scholarship at the law school beyond traditional legal academic confines and to serve as an outlet for interested students, practitioners, and faculty...