Download Free Toward A Discourse Of Consent Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Toward A Discourse Of Consent and write the review.

Focuses on the interaction between American authorities, the Popular Democratic Party (PPD), and its multiple supporters that informed colonial politics in Puerto Rico.
A manifesto for a new world order.
In The Crisis from Within, Nigel Raab explores weaknesses that emerge when using interdisciplinary theories in historical analysis. With chapters that focus on knowledge, language, memory, imagining and inventing, and civil society, the analysis reveals how theoretical applications can be the source of interpretive confusion. By drawing from a global range of historical works, Nigel Raab demonstrates how this problem concerns all historical sub-fields. From science in the seventeenth century to communism in the twentieth century, theories often overdetermine analysis in a way the historian never intended. After the enthusiastic reception of theory for over a generation, The Crisis from Within argues that the time has come to pause and think seriously about how we wish to proceed with theory.
In a community that takes rights seriously, consent features pervasively in both moral and legal discourse as a justifying reason: stated simply, where there is consent, there can be no complaint. However, without a clear appreciation of the nature of a consent-based justification, its integrity, both in principle and in practice, is liable to be compromised. This book examines the role of consent as a procedural justification, discussing the prerequisites for an adequate consent -- in particular, that an agent with the relevant capacity has made an unforced and informed choice, that the consent has been clearly signalled, and that the scope of the authorisation covers the act in question. It goes on to highlight both the Fallacy of Necessity (where there is no consent, there must be a wrong) and the Fallacy of Sufficiency (where there is consent, there cannot be a wrong). Finally, the extent to which the authority of law itself rests on consent is considered. If the familiarity of consent-based justification engenders confusion and contempt, the analysis in this book acts as a corrective, identifying a range of abusive or misguided practices that variously under-value or over-value consent, that fictionalise it or that are fixated by it, and that treat it too casually or too cautiously. In short, the analysis in Consent in the Law points the way towards recognising an important procedural justification for precisely what it is as well as giving it a more coherent application.
Within the political sphere, a political actor is often judged by what he or she says, with their verbal performance often perceived as representative of the individual. Hearers accept that, as individuals, they possess a lifetime of experiences and actions which inform, but may also undermine, their aspirations in gaining political capital. Additionally, as representatives of a political party and its ideology, these actors do not exist in isolation; they are members and, at times, potential candidates of a particular party with its own agenda which may, in turn, cause them to modify their personal speech to align with espoused policies of the party. The various contributions contained in this volume examine the discourse of political actors through the lenses of positionality and stance. Throughout its chapters, clearly defined theoretical perspectives and specified social practices are employed, enabling the authors to elucidate how political actors can situate themselves, their party, and their opponents toward their ostensive public. This book successfully demonstrates how espoused perspectives relate to, or reflect on, the nature of the individual political actor and their truth, the party they represent and its ideology, and the pandering to popular public opinion to gain support and co-operation. This book will hold particular appeal for postgraduate students, researchers, and scholars of discourse studies, pragmatics, political science, as well as other areas in humanities and the social sciences.
Winner of the 2020 OSCLG Outstanding Book Award This new book for scholars and university administrators offers a provocative critique of sexual justice language and policy in higher education around the concept of consent. Complicating the idea that consent is plain common sense, Campuses of Consent shows how normative and inaccurate concepts about gender, gender identity, and sexuality erase queer or trans students' experiences and perpetuate narrow, regressive gender norms and individualist frameworks for understanding violence. Theresa A. Kulbaga and Leland G. Spencer prove that consent in higher education cannot be meaningfully separated from larger issues of institutional and structural power and oppression. While sexual assault advocacy campaigns, such as It's On Us, federal legislation from Title IX to the Clery Act, and more recent affirmative-consent measures tend to construct consent in individualist terms, as something "given" or "received" by individuals, the authors imagine consent as something that can be constructed systemically and institutionally: in classrooms, campus communication, and shared campus spaces.
Analysing how Indigenous Peoples come to be identifiable as bearers of human rights, this book considers how individuals and communities claim the right of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) as Indigenous peoples. The basic notion of FPIC is that states should seek Indigenous peoples’ consent before taking actions that will have an impact on them, their territories or their livelihoods. FPIC is an important development for Indigenous peoples, their advocates and supporters because one might assume that, where states recognize it, Indigenous peoples will have the ability to control how non-Indigenous laws and actions will affect them. But who exactly are the Indigenous peoples that are the subjects of this discourse? This book argues that the subject status of Indigenous peoples emerged out of international law in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Then, through a series of case studies, it considers how self-identifying Indigenous peoples, scholars, UN institutions and non-government organizations (NGOs) dispersed that subject-status and associated rights discourse through international and national legal contexts. It shows that those who claim international human rights as Indigenous peoples performatively become identifiable subjects of international law – but further demonstrates that this does not, however, provide them with control over, or emancipation from, a state-based legal system. Maintaining that the discourse on Indigenous peoples and international law itself needs to be theoretically and critically re-appraised, this book problematises the subject-status of those who claim Indigenous peoples’ rights and the role of scholars, institutions, NGOs and others in producing that subject-status. Squarely addressing the limitations of international human rights law, it nevertheless goes on to provide a conceptual framework for rethinking the promise and power of Indigenous peoples’ rights. Original and sophisticated, the book will appeal to scholars, activists and lawyers involved with indigenous rights, as well as those with more general interests in the operation of international law.
This current and timely volume presents new thinking and new directions in feminist legal scholarship. Rethinking key concepts in legal feminism, Cowan and Hunter provide a unique examination of key socio-legal concepts in law, jurisprudence and legal and political theory. Written by an international cast of contributors, offering different cultural perspectives as well as doctrinal and theoretical knowledge, this collection of essays presents a dialogue between different feminist positions and approaches to a common theme. It addresses a range of questions, including: Can 'consent' be rethought and infused with different meanings in a post-liberal feminist politics? Can the concepts of 'choice' and 'consent' have consistent meanings and functions between different areas of law, or whether they prove to be highly contingent when viewed across the broad field of law. Exploring the deeply gendered concepts of ‘choice’ and ‘consent’ and examining the philosophical and jurisprudential issues surrounding them as well as how ‘choice’ and ‘consent’ operate in particular areas of law, including criminal law, medical law, constitutional law, employment law, family law and civil procedure, this volume is a key resource for postgraduate law students studying jurisprudence.
There is a difference between narrative and the quality of representation when discussing topics in mass media. However, the difference between narrative and the quality of representation is often ignored when same-sex sex is portrayed in media. Missing from a significant amount of the literature on same-sex sexual behavior is how mass media discuss sexual consent. To fill the gap in the literature, I will examine the following: 1) how mainstream media's discourse on same-sex sexual consent (SSSC) is similar to queer media's discourse on same-sex sexual consent, and 2) how media messages define sexual consent between same-sex individuals. To examine these questions, I analyzed 15 texts from English-language mainstream media and queer media outlets. My analysis found that mainstream media's discourse on same-sex sexual consent is similar to queer media's discourse on same-sex sexual consent due to the language used, the emotions conveyed, the definitions provided, the types of sexual assault discussed, and reader reaction. Additionally, my analysis found that mainstream and queer media messages use the cultural understanding of different-sex sexual consent (DSSC) and assault to define same-sex sexual consent. This research moves U.S. society towards a more accepting and tolerating society towards individuals who engage in same-sex sexual activity.