Order:
Disambiguations
Janet R. Jakobsen [4]Janet Ruth Jakobsen [1]
  1. Obama's Neo-New Deal: Religion, Secularism, and Sex in Political Debates Now.Janet R. Jakobsen & Ann Pellegrini - 2009 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 76 (4):1227-1254.
    The "religious and secular divide" cannot be understood unless we think about the way sex gets mobilized on both sides of this supposed divide. In our joint writing, we have resisted thinking of the religious and the secular as a divide; we have rather been interested to think them relationally—as relations. Thus, the larger suggestion of this paper is that we cannot truly imagine and practice democratic politics—to name some keywords for this discussion—unless we rethink the relations between sex, secularism, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  25
    Agency and Alliance in Public Discourses About Sexualities.Janet R. Jakobsen - 1995 - Hypatia 10 (1):133 - 154.
    Alliance politics is not always an easy proposition. In public discourses about sexualities, unexpected alliances and splits occur even as accomplished alliances fail to achieve their political goals. By considering the models of agency enacted in a series of these alliances, I question how lesbian and feminist and queer actors can more effectively pursue alliance politics in relation to U.S. public policy.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3.  11
    Deconstructing the Paradox of Modernity: Feminism, Enlightenment, and Cross-Cultural Moral Interactions.Janet R. Jakobsen - 1995 - Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (2):333-363.
    Feminist ethics has questioned the limits of and possibilities for the recognition of moral diversity within the Enlightenment legacy of Western rationality and modern universalism. I pursue this question by reading two contemporary theorists, Jürgen Habermas and Seyla Benhabib, who express a strong commitment to the recognition of diversity within a reason-centered reading of the Enlightenment. Despite their strong commitments, however, neither Habermas nor Benhabib can ultimately maintain a balance between the poles of egalitarianism and universalism within the framework of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark