Convention All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: National Women's Studies Association URL: http://www.nwsa.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p168666_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Fraley, Jill. "Truth-seeking and Law: Can Feminist Research and Writing Become Admissible in Court?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Women's Studies Association, TBA, St. Charles, IL, Pheasant Run, Jun 28, 2007 <Not Available>. 2009-05-24 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p168666_index.html>

Fraley, J. , 2007-06-28 "Truth-seeking and Law: Can Feminist Research and Writing Become Admissible in Court?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Women's Studies Association, TBA, St. Charles, IL, Pheasant Run <Not Available>. 2009-05-24 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p168666_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Abstract: This paper explores how feminist voices construct truth in contrast with the positivist traditions that remain the mainstay of litigation in America. In response to junk science, courts have constructed elaborate devices to determine when research is sufficiently reliable. The resulting hierarchy of knowledge privileges the mind over the body, the articulate over the inexpressibly known, replicable and experimental methodologies over more inclusive patterns of knowledge. I argue that in their desire to exclude junk science, our courts have accepted wholesale the positivist presumptions, and thereby effectively excluded feminist voices from the truth-givers in the courtroom.

So Common Law Is Really About Truth After All? Reviving a Forgotten Debate About Search for Truth in Criminal Courts

Adultery, Feminist Abolitionists, and Constitutional Court in Taiwan: Why did Feminists Fail in the Movement of Abolishing Adultery as a Crime?

Opinion Writing in the U.S. Supreme Court and the High Court of Australia

Seeking Truth after Fifty Years: Truth Commission on Jeju April 3rd Massacre in Korea