Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-pvkqz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-30T00:31:54.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“How Does Change Happen?” Deliberation and Difficulty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Brooke A. Ackerly
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Theoretically, feminists ought to be the best deliberative democrats. However, political commitments (which this author shares) to inclusiveness on issues of reproductive health and gay and lesbian rights, for example, create a boundary within feminism between those committed to the “feminist consensus” on these issues and women activists who share some feminist commitments, but not all. This article offers theoretically and empirically informed suggestions for how feminists can foster inclusive deliberation within feminist spaces.

Information

Type
Revisioning Deliberation
Information
Hypatia , Volume 22 , Issue 4: Special Issue: Democratic Theory , Fall 2007 , pp. 46 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ackerly, Brooke A. 2000. Political theory and feminist social criticism: Contemporary political theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerly, Brooke A. 2006. Deliberative democracy theory for building global civil society: Designing a virtual community of activists. Contemporary Political Theory 5(2): 113–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerly, Brooke A. Forthcoming. Universal human rights in a world of difference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beneria, Lourdes, and Sen, Gita. 1982. Class and gender inequalities and women's role in economic development: Theoretical and practical implications. Feminist Studies 8(1): 157–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla. 2002. The claims of culture: Equality and diversity in the global era. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohman, James. 2003. Deliberative toleration. Political Theory 31(6): 757–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunch, Charlotte. 1990. Women's rights as human rights: Toward a re‐vision of human rights. Human Rights Quarterly 12(November): 486–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buruma, Ian, and Margalit, Avishai. 2004. Occidentalism: The West in the eyes of its enemies. New York: Pengu.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139–67.Google Scholar
Crenshaw, Kimberlé. 2000. Gender‐related aspects of race discrimination. Paper presented at the Expert Meeting on Gender‐Related Aspects of Race Discrimination, November 21–24, Zagreb, Croatia.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert. 1997. On deliberative democracy: Citizen panels and Medicare reform. Dissent (Summer): 54–58.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927/1954. The public and its problems. Chicago: Swallow Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1932/1990. The making of citizens: A comparative study of methods of civic training, by Edward, Charles Merriam: University of Chicago Press, 1931. In John Dewey: The later works, 1925–1953, ed. Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1942/1989. Religion and morality in a free society. In John Dewey: The later works, 1925–1953, ed. Boydston, Jo Ann. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dialogues, Feminist. 2005. Concept note for the Feminist Dialogues, on file with the author. Feminist Dialogues, January 23–25, Porto Alegre, Brazil .Google Scholar
Francisco, Josefa S. 2003. Paradoxes for gender in social movements. Development 46(2): 24–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutmann, Amy, and Thompson, Dennis F. 1996. Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kymlicka, Will. 1995. Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Manin, Bernard. 1987. On legitimacy and political deliberation. Trans. Elly Stein and Jane Mansbridge. Political Theory 15(3): 338–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAfee, Noëlle. 2004. Three models of democratic deliberation. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18(1): 44–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Misak, Cheryl. 2004. Making disagreement matter: Pragmatism and deliberative democracy. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18(1): 9–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. The democratic paradox. New York: Verso.Google Scholar
Narayan, Uma. 1997. Dislocating cultures: Identities, traditions, and Third‐World feminism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1999. Is multiculturalism bad for women? In Is multiculturalism bad for women? ed. Cohen, Joshua Howard, Matthew, and Nussbaum, Martha C. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1999. The law of peoples; with, The idea of public reason revisited. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rothschild, Cynthia, Long, Scott, and Fried, Susana T., eds. 2005. Written out: How sexuality is used to attack women's organizing. New York: International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission & The Center for Women's Global Leadership.Google Scholar
Shachar, Ayelet. 2001. Multicultural jurisdictions: Cultural differences and women's rights. In Contemporary Political Theory, ed. Shapiro, Ian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2003. The state of democratic theory. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shiffman, Gary. 2002. Construing disagreement: Consensus and invective in “constitutional” debate. Political Theory 30(2): 175–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, Sarah. 2005. Majority norms, multiculturalism, and gender equality. American Political Science Review 99(4): 473–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokes, Susan. 1998. Pathologies of deliberation. Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass. 2002. Punitive damages: How juries decide. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 2001. Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory 29(5): 670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar