Pub Date : 2019-09-25DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0003
Shreya Atrey
Chapter 2 posits a theoretical framework of intersectionality for the purposes of discrimination law. It identifies the core of intersectionality as comprising several mutually reinforcing aspects which include: the simultaneous focus on sameness and difference; interest in explicating patterns of group disadvantage; an appreciation of integrity of identity and context; and its final aim of transformation. The chapter also responds to some of the most pertinent and persisting critiques of intersectionality theory. Taking the example of Dalit feminism in India, the chapter then goes on to illustrate the relevance of intersectionality theory in discursive spaces. With this, the chapter develops, defends, and applies the framework of intersectionality, which helps unravel the distinct nature of intersectional discrimination.
{"title":"The Theory","authors":"Shreya Atrey","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 posits a theoretical framework of intersectionality for the purposes of discrimination law. It identifies the core of intersectionality as comprising several mutually reinforcing aspects which include: the simultaneous focus on sameness and difference; interest in explicating patterns of group disadvantage; an appreciation of integrity of identity and context; and its final aim of transformation. The chapter also responds to some of the most pertinent and persisting critiques of intersectionality theory. Taking the example of Dalit feminism in India, the chapter then goes on to illustrate the relevance of intersectionality theory in discursive spaces. With this, the chapter develops, defends, and applies the framework of intersectionality, which helps unravel the distinct nature of intersectional discrimination.","PeriodicalId":115138,"journal":{"name":"Intersectional Discrimination","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132202131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-25DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0004
Shreya Atrey
This chapter examines how intersectional discrimination has been understood in discrimination law. The analysis reveals that courts across jurisdictions have understood this category of discrimination not only as a matter of intersectionality, but also in various other ways, such as single-axis discrimination, multiple discrimination, additive discrimination, embedded discrimination, and compound discrimination. The chapter considers the relative position of these categories along a continuum and maps the qualitative differences between them as against the category of intersectional discrimination. It argues that the differences matter diagnostically in that only the category of intersectional discrimination properly so called, explains the causality in intersectional discrimination based on multiple grounds.
{"title":"The Concept","authors":"Shreya Atrey","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines how intersectional discrimination has been understood in discrimination law. The analysis reveals that courts across jurisdictions have understood this category of discrimination not only as a matter of intersectionality, but also in various other ways, such as single-axis discrimination, multiple discrimination, additive discrimination, embedded discrimination, and compound discrimination. The chapter considers the relative position of these categories along a continuum and maps the qualitative differences between them as against the category of intersectional discrimination. It argues that the differences matter diagnostically in that only the category of intersectional discrimination properly so called, explains the causality in intersectional discrimination based on multiple grounds.","PeriodicalId":115138,"journal":{"name":"Intersectional Discrimination","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126649092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-25DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002
Shreya Atrey
Chapter 1 inaugurates the project by setting out the current status of intersectionality in discrimination laws across jurisdictions, including the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, and India, and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and international human rights treaty bodies. Although each jurisdiction’s tryst with intersectionality has been unique, the survey concludes by pointing out the similarities between the continuing legislative and judicial struggles in redressing intersectional discrimination successfully. This prepares the stage for the current intervention. The chapter goes on to define the central argument of this work and the parameters within which it unfolds. In particular, it explains the choice of comparative jurisdictions and the wide range of materials employed in making a case for intersectional discrimination.
{"title":"The Project","authors":"Shreya Atrey","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 1 inaugurates the project by setting out the current status of intersectionality in discrimination laws across jurisdictions, including the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, and India, and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and international human rights treaty bodies. Although each jurisdiction’s tryst with intersectionality has been unique, the survey concludes by pointing out the similarities between the continuing legislative and judicial struggles in redressing intersectional discrimination successfully. This prepares the stage for the current intervention. The chapter goes on to define the central argument of this work and the parameters within which it unfolds. In particular, it explains the choice of comparative jurisdictions and the wide range of materials employed in making a case for intersectional discrimination.","PeriodicalId":115138,"journal":{"name":"Intersectional Discrimination","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134600590","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-09-25DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0006
Shreya Atrey
This conclusion closes the book with a reminder that the endeavour to have the traditional model of discrimination law fit intersectionality may be ill-conceived. It thus highlights the urgency of remoulding discrimination law for the purposes of a distinct category of intersectional discrimination per se. It reiterates the theoretical and doctrinal steps needed to do this. The book concludes by seeing the present work as just one part of intersectionality’s transformative agenda and it underscores the significance of broader non-judicial efforts in realizing intersectionality catholically.
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"Shreya Atrey","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"This conclusion closes the book with a reminder that the endeavour to have the traditional model of discrimination law fit intersectionality may be ill-conceived. It thus highlights the urgency of remoulding discrimination law for the purposes of a distinct category of intersectional discrimination per se. It reiterates the theoretical and doctrinal steps needed to do this. The book concludes by seeing the present work as just one part of intersectionality’s transformative agenda and it underscores the significance of broader non-judicial efforts in realizing intersectionality catholically.","PeriodicalId":115138,"journal":{"name":"Intersectional Discrimination","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125175865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：