Introduction to the Research Handbook on Gender, Sexuality and Law

Abstract

This collection could not have existed five or ten years ago. While collections of gender, sexuality and law scholarship have periodically been produced since the 1990s, it is arguably in the past decade or so that this area has matured into a developed field. This edited collection forms part of Edward Elgar's Law and Society series (edited by Austin Sarat and Rosemary Hunter). This particular collection seeks not only to document the prodigious debates of the present, but to point the way to future sociolegal scholarship in the area of gender, sexuality and law. We sought to bring together scholars from different generations and different viewpoints to provide a sense of the current gender, sexuality and law research landscape. This is a field that is in many ways defined by contested concepts and ongoing debates: within feminism, between feminism and other concepts; between queer theorists, liberationists and those who embrace the equality movement; and between those who resist these temptations to label and define perspectives and those who do not. While many collections inevitably betray editor or author viewpoints in assembling collections, this book seeks to bring together a range of differing perspectives to truly reflect the field of gender, sexuality and the law. The authors will often not agree with one another, let alone the editors, but we feel this is critical for the development of the field and to enable a rich engagement with the research in this area by those new to this area of scholarship.

“There Are Good and Bad Elements to It for Sure”: Students’ and Faculty/Staff’s Perceptions of the Title IX Mandated Reporting Policy

“…These policies have goals to protect survivors, yet there are increasing complexities in implementation, as well as the potential for ineffective or harmful outcomes (e.g., Stader & Williams-Cunningham, 2017). Specifically, scholars have critiqued the policy’s potential to be disempowering and retraumatizing for survivors, as well as the way that reporting standards may limit forthright interactions between HEIs faculty/staff and students (e.g., Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; Cabrera, 2020; Newins et al, 2018). The complexity of HEIs reporting policies for gender-based violence, and the administrative changes disseminated through various sources, have likely impacted the perceptions, understanding, and impact of such policies.…”

“…Although several scholars (e.g., Engle, 2015; Harper et al, 2017; Holland et al, 2021) have named their concerns regarding the mandated reporting policy, limited empirical research has been conducted to investigate such concerns with Brubaker and Mancini (2017) calling this area of inquiry an “empirical black box” (p. 298). To date, seven studies have empirically examined the Title IX mandated reporting (Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; Cabrera, 2020; Holland, Cipriano, & Huit, 2020; Holland & Cortina, 2017; Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins & White, 2018; Newins et al, 2018). The majority of this research has focused on employees’ perceptions of mandated reporting (student employees—Holland & Cortina, 2017; HEIs victim advocates—Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; feminist faculty—Cabrera, 2020; faculty/staff—Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins & White, 2018; Newins et al, 2018).…”

“…To date, seven studies have empirically examined the Title IX mandated reporting (Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; Cabrera, 2020; Holland, Cipriano, & Huit, 2020; Holland & Cortina, 2017; Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins & White, 2018; Newins et al, 2018). The majority of this research has focused on employees’ perceptions of mandated reporting (student employees—Holland & Cortina, 2017; HEIs victim advocates—Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; feminist faculty—Cabrera, 2020; faculty/staff—Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins & White, 2018; Newins et al, 2018). Across studies, participants were generally aware (75%–80% [Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins et al, 2018]) and in support of mandated reporting policies (56%–89% [Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; Holland & Cortina, 2017; Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins et al, 2018]).…”

“…Department of Education, 2011). Based on previous research (Brubaker & Mancini, 2017; Cabrera, 2020; Holland, Cipriano, & Huit, 2020; Holland & Cortina, 2017; Koon-Magnin & Mancini, 2023; Newins & White, 2018; Newins et al, 2018), the hypotheses for the current study are:…”