透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.142.200.226
  • 期刊

女性主義轉移法律公、私界線之實踐台灣的性騷擾立法探究

Feminist Challenges to Public/Private Distinctions in Law an Inquiry into the Jurisprudence of Sexual Harassment in Taiwan

摘要


挑戰公、私界線是女性主義近年來對法律思想與體系,所提出重要且具影響力之批判,而此一女性主義法學挑戰也發生於台灣,並成功地影響了相關立法。然而,在這些女性主義法學主張落實為法律制度的過程裡,會與該社會場域中其他相關論述產生什麼樣的互動?這些互動又如何影響女性主義法學實現性別平等目的?這些議題的相關研究與討論目前似乎仍十分缺乏。 本文嘗試討論台灣社會中,女性主義因挑戰公、私界線,而發展出之法律論述實踐過程。以性騷擾為主題,檢視台灣性騷擾法律規範,以及相關立法過程中的各種討論。本文之分析由Foucault式觀點著手,亦即將特定法律規範之形成與運作,視為社會脈絡中的動態論述實踐,透過此觀點,除檢視此新論述中法律主體之形塑外,並重視分析此新論述如何與社會脈絡中其他論述競爭與協商,因而使原有論述被重新詮釋、甚至轉換等現象。 本文主張由於有著不同的公、私論述傳統,因此,雖然台灣引用了美國對於性騷擾的法律規範,但在此新論述形成與實踐過程中,台灣置換了美國用以正當化性騷擾立法的關係性自我之法律主體,並弔詭地開啟了國家進一步干預介入公民生活之場域,因而出現國家以道德規訓論述寄生於原來旨在實現性別平權之法律論述的現象。

並列摘要


One significant contribution of the feminist movement in advancing gender equality is to challenge established public/private distinctions in legal systems. Over the past two decades, such feminist jurisprudential challenges to the public/private distinction have successfully been incorporated in the form of legal regulations in Taiwan. However, to date very little research examines how, during the process of forging them into law and implementing them in practice, these arguments are negotiated or compete with correlative discourses in Taiwan, or how these processes affect the enforcement of gender equality. To explore these issues, this study focuses on the jurisprudence of sexual harassment in Taiwan. Employing a Foucaultian perspective, which conceives an article of law as a living discourse operated in context and practice, this paper examines the forms of legal subjects assumed in the enactment of new regulations, and how the struggles between competing discourses lead to unexpected transformations in the original law. This article argues that while sexual harassment regulation in Taiwan is highly influenced by American precedent, its translation into the context of a different Taiwanese public/private distinction has led, in practice, to the displacement of the very legal subject of the relational self which was originally employed to justify the jurisprudence of sexual harassment in America. The enactment of sexual harassment regulations also paradoxically creates a new field which enables the state's surplus intervention into citizens' lives, allowing the state's moral disciplinary sanctions to sneak into a law intended to ensure gender equality.

參考文獻


卡維波(1999)。性騷擾的共識建構與立法:對吳敏倫觀點的進一步討論。性/別研究:性侵害、性騷擾專號。5-6,293-313。
吳敏倫(1999)。我對訂立性騷擾刑法的意見。性/別研究:性侵害、性騷擾專號。5-6,283-290。
陳惠馨(2005)。女性主義法學與性別主流化。律師雜誌。313,15-37。
黃克武、黃俊傑編、江宜樺編(2005)。公私領域新探:東亞與西方觀點之比較。台北:台大出版中心。
黃俊傑、黃俊傑編、江宜樺編(2005)。公私領域新探:東亞與西方觀點之比較。台北:台大出版中心。

被引用紀錄


廖紀華、林燕卿、鍾成鴻(2021)。台灣性騷擾研究發展與展望:文獻回顧報告性學研究12(1),87-103。https://doi.org/10.6206/SIS.202107_12(1).0004
蘇滿麗(2012)。法規範建構與實踐分析─以性騷擾為核心〔博士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201613532007
周昕緯(2013)。論乘機猥褻罪、強制猥褻罪與性觸摸罪之區分標準-兼評析法院判決〔碩士論文,國立臺北大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0023-2201201315281700

延伸閱讀