Feminist legal theory: outline of the issue

In theory and philosophy of law, or as one can say, in j urisprudence, the dispute about the nature of the law has existed for ages.Traditionally, the axis of the dispute was denoted by advocates of natura!law and !egal positivism.Simplifying this debate, they have a different answer to the basie question.Whether the law consists of a set of universal mora! principles or is it simply a set of rules, orders or norms w hi eh are, for the most part, the artifact.Th is is a normative view of the law, both in the first case and in the second.Moreover, this is a view of the law that is, in principle, neutral, objective, and just.We can say that the law talks with too much pride about itself and that under the rule of law, the liberal idea! of equality is reassured.Such a vision of the law nowadays is not commonly accepted and without criticism.The law is often depicted as uncertain, ambiguous, and unstable.As many critical theorists assert, the law reproduces economic and political power.Consequently, the law is far from being neutral, determinate or objective.1These critical remarks can be justified in different ways, but a significant component of the critical assault on law is the myth of its determ ination.As Deborah Rhode points out: "This theoretical approach partly overlaps, and frequently draws upon other critical approaches ... At the most general level, these traditions share a common goal: to challenge existing distribution of power."2The analysis of the arguments above isolates the positions more precise.lt can be labeled as 'a strand' or as 'a school'.The first critical approach is Critical Lega!Studies (CLS).CLS is often characterized as a subsequent version of the American realist movement of the l 920s 1