Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorGrear, Anna
dc.date.accessioned2013-04-26T02:55:38Z
dc.date.available2013-04-26T02:55:38Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.citationGrear, A. (2011). Three feminist critiques of varying feminist capitulations to crisis-hegemony. In S. Kouvo & Z. Pearson (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on contemporary international law: Between resistance and compliance? (pp. 71-74). Portland, OR: Hart Publishing.en_NZ
dc.identifier.isbn9781841134284
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/7529
dc.description.abstractThe seemingly intractable pull between the Scylla of 'resistance' and the Charybdis of 'compliance' and the agonistic dilemmas presented by the complexity and difficulty of positioning feminism in relation to them both is well-traced in these chapters by Dianne Otto, Julie Mertus and Maria Grahn-Farley. While a range of themes emerges from reflection on these nuanced and thoughtful chapters, at the heart of each, in different ways, the colonisation of certain emancipatory feminist projects and agendas by the crisis-driven post 9/11 international legal discourse emerges as a central concern, along with a set of related sub-themes: The traction (and inequality) of hegemonic and counter-hegemonic thought-worlds and actions; the pernicious effects of decontextualisation (either the transcendence or the 'emptying out' of context (including,worryingly, lived experience of violation)); the fragile potency of ground level viewpoint, action and perspective; the false totality of the securityhegemon; its liquid propagandism, and related concerns circling around co-opted feminist responses.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherHart Publishingen_NZ
dc.rights© 2011 Hart Publishing. Used with permission.en_NZ
dc.titleThree feminist critiques of varying feminist capitulations to crisis-hegemonyen_NZ
dc.typeChapter in Booken_NZ


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record