Do you want to stay informed about this journal? Click the buttons to subscribe to our alerts.
Grounded Normative Theory and Intersectional Differences
In: Comparative Political TheoryAbstract
This article focuses on the promise of grounded normative theory in Luis Cabrera’s The Humble Cosmopolitan. The article celebrates Cabrera’s use of grounded normative theory as a way to center the lived experience of politically marginalized groups while also being attentive to the politics of knowledge production. My concern is not with the methodology itself; rather, it is with Cabrera’s partial use of it. I ask, how might the analysis of the book change if the author considered different intellectual histories of citizenship rooted in feminist and critical approaches? How might the theoretical assumptions and justifications of the book change if the author challenged his own assumptions, especially as they relate to the epistemic authority of Dalit women?
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Ackerly, B. (2018). Just Responsibility: A Human Rights Theory of Global Justice. New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Behl, N. (2017). Gendered Discipline, Gendered Space: An Ethnographic Approach to Gendered Violence in India. Space & Polity 21 (1), pp. 43–58.
-
Behl, N. (2019). Gendered Citizenship: Understanding Gendered Violence in Democratic India. New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Cabrera, L. (2010). The Practice of Global Citizenship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Cabrera, L. (2020). The Humble Cosmopolitan: Rights, Diversity, and Trans-State Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Glenn, E. (2002). Unequal Freedom: How Race and Gender Shaped American Citizenship and Labor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
-
Kapur, R. (2002). The Tragedy of Victimization Rhetoric: Resurrecting the Native Subject in International/Postcolonial Feminist Legal Politics. Harvard Human Rights Law Journal 15 (1), pp. 1–37.
-
Keating, C. (2011). Decolonizing Democracy: Transforming the Social Contract in India. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
-
Lee, F. (2018). Extraordinary Racial Politics: Four Events in the Informal Constitution of the United States. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
-
Lister, R. (1997). Citizenship: Towards a Feminist Synthesis. Feminist Review 57, pp. 28–48.
-
Lister, R. (2007). Inclusive Citizenship: Realizing the Potential. Citizenship Studies 11 (1), pp. 49–61.
-
Mani, L. (1987). Contentious Traditions: The Debate on Sati in Colonial India. Cultural Critique 7, pp. 119–56.
-
Menon, N. (2004). Recovering Subversion: Feminist Politics beyond the Law. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
-
Sangari, K. & Vaid, S. (1999). Institutions, Beliefs, Ideologies: Widow Immolation in Contemporary Rajasthan. In: N. Menon, ed., Gender and Politics in India. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 383–440.
-
Siim, B. (2013). Citizenship. In: G. Waylen, K. Celis, J. Kantola, & S.L. Weldon, eds., The Oxford University Handbook of Gender and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 756–80.
-
Sunder Rajan, R. (2003). The Scandal of the State: Women, Law, and Citizenship in Postcolonial India. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
-
Yuval-Davis, N. (1997). Women, Citizenship and Difference. Feminist Review 57, pp. 4–27.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 236 | 115 | 2 |
| Full Text Views | 13 | 11 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 31 | 0 |
Grounded Normative Theory and Intersectional Differences
In: Comparative Political TheoryAbstract
This article focuses on the promise of grounded normative theory in Luis Cabrera’s The Humble Cosmopolitan. The article celebrates Cabrera’s use of grounded normative theory as a way to center the lived experience of politically marginalized groups while also being attentive to the politics of knowledge production. My concern is not with the methodology itself; rather, it is with Cabrera’s partial use of it. I ask, how might the analysis of the book change if the author considered different intellectual histories of citizenship rooted in feminist and critical approaches? How might the theoretical assumptions and justifications of the book change if the author challenged his own assumptions, especially as they relate to the epistemic authority of Dalit women?
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 236 | 115 | 2 |
| Full Text Views | 13 | 11 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 35 | 31 | 0 |