Skip to main content

Australia’s gendered constitutional history and future

Citations of this article
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text


This volume enables us to think about constitutions and constitutionalism and difference in diverse ways. The countries discussed vary in multiple manners; some are democracies and others not, some are old and others new and they are all influenced in varying degrees by ethnicity, religion and language. Our chapter draws on a project that has been ongoing in Australia since the publication of Deborah Cass and Kim Rubenstein’s article “Re/presentations of Women in the Australian Constitutional System”. Underpinning this project is a view that although women and men may share many similar needs and concerns, when it comes to the political process there is the undeniable matter of practical reality that women experience the world differently to men, and they do so regardless of how many different voices women may have. Moreover, there is value in considering women both as a singular group, given that women account for more than half of the population, as well as considering the varying groups and needs within that singular group.




Rubenstein, K., & Richards-Neville, C. (2012). Australia’s gendered constitutional history and future. In Social Difference and Constitutionalism in Pan-Asia (pp. 261–291). Cambridge University Press.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free