Suchergebnisse

Dans l'arrêt R c Jarvis, la Cour suprême du Canada (CSC) a interprété pour la première fois la disposition du Code criminel sur le voyeurisme. Le présent article examine la jurisprudence pertinente en matière de voyeurisme qui a précédé l'arrêt Jarvis, y compris trois questions litigieuses qui ont façonné les interprétations judiciaires antérieures : la pertinence de la jurisprudence relative à l'article 8 de la Charte, la perspective de la vie privée en public et l'applicabilité de l'analyse du risque. Bien que les motifs de la CSC ne reconnaissent pas explicitement les questions d'égalité en jeu, son traitement de ces trois questions reflète sans doute trois volets de la théorie et de la jurisprudence féministes qui favorisent l'égalité. Cet article explore ce chevauchement, suggérant que les motifs de la CSC dans l'arrêt Jarvis peuvent être compris comme étant implicitement féministes. Reconnaissant que des motifs explicitement féministes auraient un plus grand potentiel de reconnaissance de l'égalité, l'auteure affirme que les motifs de la CSC représentent une étape positive vers une conception du droit à la vie privée en ce sens.

How can we leverage digitization to improve access to justice, without compromising the fundamental principles of our legal system? eAccess to Justice describes the many challenges that come with the integration of information and communication technologies into our courtrooms, and explores lessons learned from digitization projects from around the world.

Edited by Jane Bailey and Valerie Steeves. Contributions by Trevor Scott Milford; Akane Kanai; Assumpta Ndengeyingoma; Jacquelyn Burkell; Madelaine Saginur; Priscilla M. Regan; Diana L. Sweet; Jessica Ringrose; Laura Harvey; Jordan Fairbairn; Andrea Slane; Shaheen Shariff; Ashley DeMartini; Gillian Angrove; Matthew Johnson; Sarah Heath; Betsy Rosenblatt; Rebecca Tushnet; and Leslie Regan Shade.

Keywords: Privacy, identity, equality, online environment, women, cyberfeminism, policy

eGirls, eCitizens is a landmark work that explores the many forces that shape girls' and young women's experiences of privacy, identity, and equality in our digitally networked society. Drawing on the multi-disciplinary expertise of a remarkable team of leading Canadian and international scholars, as well as Canada's foremost digital literacy organization, MediaSmarts, this collection presents the complex realities of digitized communications for girls and young women as revealed through the findings of The eGirls Project (www.egirlsproject.ca) and other important research initiatives. Aimed at moving dialogues on scholarship and policy around girls and technology away from established binaries of good vs bad, or risk vs opportunity, these seminal contributions explore the interplay of factors that shape online environments characterized by a gendered gaze and too often punctuated by sexualized violence.

Perhaps most importantly, this collection offers first-hand perspectives collected from girls and young women themselves, providing a unique window on what it is to be a girl in today's digitized society.

Technologically-facilitated violence (TFV) can take many shapes and forms, In this thought piece, we reflect on TFV from structural and intersectional perspectives, examining how these might change our understanding of TFV, with particular attention to gender-based TFV. We are motivated to engage in this reflection for two main reasons. First, traditional understandings of violence, including gender-based violence, tend to prioritise physical acts (whether in word or in application), contributing to a trivialisation of the kinds of harms effected through digitised communications networks (Dunn, 2021). Second, if TFV is understood primarily in terms of individual interpersonal acts, our ability to understand how intersecting oppressions such as sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, colonialism affect the likelihood of being targeted and the experience of violence will be compromised. As Black feminist and critical race scholars such as Crenshaw (1991), Hill Collins (2017), and Jiwani, Berman and Cameron (2010) have ably demonstrated, individualistic single axis accounts of violence outside of technologised contexts have resulted in exclusionary and dangerous outcomes that selectively harm members of equality-seeking communities. The result of these individualised understandings of violence is that structural oppressions are 'erased, trivialised, or contained within categories that evacuate the violation of [structural] violence' (Jiwani, 2006, xi–xii). Among other effects, such erasure risks rendering invisible opportunities to intervene with respect to violence not carried out by individuals, often resulting in 'remedies' that emphasise interventions by the state against individual actors (for example, through criminal law), powers that already disproportionately target members of equality-seeking communities, and misses the potential need to intervene on capitalistic corporate systems and behaviours. In both cases, the prospect of achieving justice recedes.