Review by Choice Review
Constitutions are seldom neutral in either their designs or consequences. Irving's broadly comparative study shows in considerable detail how women both win and lose freedom and influence through seemingly "neutral" constitutional rules. Although examples from English-speaking nations predominate and subnational constitutions are virtually ignored, Irving's grasp of primary source materials is impressive, and she manages to develop insights into aspects of gender issues that have generally eluded less focused students of constitution building. Aside from a rather extensive--and insightful--discussion of federalism, Irving (Univ. of Sydney, Australia) offers far less on the effects of structures other than language. Her analysis of election rules, for example, gives relatively little attention to the political consequences of various voting systems, and the relative merits of parliamentary and presidential systems are ignored. At the same time, Irving's legal background helps to introduce subjects that all too seldom appear in the comparative constitutions literature. Her discussion of the legal concept of standing, for example, is both fascinating and unique. Interestingly, there are virtually no references here to the comparative politics literature, yet it is to students of comparative constitutions that the book may have its greatest appeal. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduate through professional collections. E. V. Schneier emeritus, City University of New York City College
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
