Politics, Groups, and Identities

ISSN: 2156-5503 (Print) 2156-5511 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpgi20

Body politics

Nadia Brown & Sarah Allen Gershon

To cite this article: Nadia Brown & Sarah Allen Gershon (2017) Body politics, Politics, Groups, and
Identities, 5:1, 1-3, DOI: 10.1080/21565503.2016.1276022

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2016.1276022

Published online: 07 Apr 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 15

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpgi20

Download by: [80.82.77.83] Date: 27 April 2017, At: 04:09

POLITICS, GROUPS, AND IDENTITIES, 2017
VOL. 5, NO. 1, 1–3
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2016.1276022

INTRODUCTION

Body politics
Nadia Browna and Sarah Allen Gershonb
a
Department of Political Science, African American Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA;
b
Department of Political Science, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA
ARTICLE HISTORY Received 20 December 2016; Accepted 20 December 2016

Bodies are sites in which social constructions of differences are mapped onto human beings.
Subjecting the body to systemic regimes – such as government regulation – is a method of
ensuring that bodies will behave in socially and politically accepted manners. The body is
placed in hierarchized (false) dichotomies, for example, masculine/feminine; mind/body;
able-bodied/disabled; fat/skinny; heterosexual/homosexual; and young/old. Furthermore,
these dichotomies illustrate that public/private borders are unstable. For example, govern-
ments either choose to recognize the rights for minorities or justify discrimination and mar-
ginalization for minorities. The denial of constitutional rights of women seeking abortions,
racial/ethnic minorities, gay men, lesbians, and transgendered people, or people with disabil-
ities have demonstrated the unequal application of free speech, due process, privacy rights,
and the Equal Protection clause. Citizenship entitlements are not available for bodies that
transgress cultural, social, sexual, and/or political boundaries.
Feminist scholars have argued that the body is both socially shaped and colonized.1 The
politics of the body, different from the body politic, argues that the body itself is politically
inscribed and is shaped by practices of containment and control. Locating the body within
a Western intellectual history perhaps starts with Marx but was popularized by Foucault.2
Marx contended that the body was marked with a person’s economic class which in turn
affected his experiences. Foucault (1977) later argued that the body is a central point for
analyzing the shape of power. Indeed, issues ranging from population size to gender for-
mation and those that society has deemed deviant are inherently political. These issues,
among others, define and shape the body. The “cultivation of the body is essential” to
determine how one will behave in society (Johnson 1989, 6). Linda Zerilli has noted
that Foucault’s scholarship has guided feminist theorists to understand how the “body
has been historically disciplined” as well as the basis for many essentialist claims (1991, 2).
In this way, examining the body provides scholars with a mode of subjectivity that was
previously misrepresented. Social conditioning and normalization incorrectly assume a
stable nature of identity and power relations. However, this reduces individual agency
and subjectivity. As active subjects, marginalized bodies can confound the dominant dis-
course by opposing prevailing ideologies that have marked the body with meaning. To be
sure, power relations are dynamic, nuanced, and highly contextual. Power is not mani-
fested in a static form. As such, resistance and change are incessant. Analyzing the
body as a site where power is contested and negotiated provides scholars with the
ability to examine the fluidity of privilege and marginalization.

CONTACT Nadia Brown brown957@purdue.edu

© 2017 Western Political Science Association
2 N. BROWN AND S. A. GERSHON

This special edition of Politics, Groups, and Identities includes innovative scholarship
on body politics that examines epistemological and/or empirical accounts of bodily differ-
ence broadly defined. The theme of body politics directs our attention to how bodies are
included or excluded in the polity. How do governments respond to the political demands
of bodies that transgress normative boundaries? What ways do physical representations of
difference impact power relations? How does the regulation of bodies, or the lack of regu-
lation, impact society? In what ways do transgressive bodies that cross state boundaries
challenge or reify national/international power relations? How do moral perspectives
and virtues indicate how bodies need to be regulated and protected? This special issue
also showcases the myriad of ways bodies can be studied theoretically, qualitatively, and
quantitatively. The dialogues section expands on this theme, with authors exploring differ-
ent approaches to the study of bodies. These pieces serve to remind us of the salient role
bodies play in shaping political attitudes, actions, and rights and clearly highlight the need
for great research in this field.
The work included in this special edition explores how and why different bodies are
excluded, marginalized, or threatened. First, Miller, Flores, Haider-Markel, Lewis,
Tadlock, and Tayolr’s study illustrates that social and morality norms shape political atti-
tudes. Diverging from other research into policy support, this study highlights the impact
of body-centered considerations. As these authors illustrate – feelings of disgust toward
transgendered bodies, as well as authoritarianism shapes attitudes toward civil rights
and gender expression.
Sharrow and Knight explore the regulation of female bodies in distinct ways. Sharrow
confronts the politicization of female athlete’s bodies through Title IX. As her archival
study reveals, the implementation of Title IX has complicated outcomes. On the one
hand, this policy has increased opportunities for some women’s bodies, yet it favors sex
as a characteristic of bodies in such a way that marginalizes other bodies – such as
those of transgender athletes. Knight expands our understanding of how disabled
bodies are politicized and regulated, arguing that reproductive liberty – in particular,
the right to motherhood – is constrained for disabled women. The practical implications
for theoretically shifting how we articulate reproductive self-determination for women of
color, poor women, and women with disabilities would protect these vulnerable popu-
lations from unwarranted government interference.
Considering the role of bodies in political engagement, Ebila and Tripp explore the
display of the naked female body during land protests in Uganda. In their case study,
the authors highlight the symbolic nature of women’s and mothers’ bodies, showing
how the association between shame and nakedness was leveraged in political resistance
to land grabs. This study further underscores the unique cultural beliefs and traditions
which gave the naked female body particular symbolic power during these protests.
Moving to a focus on the inclusion of different bodies in government, Smith, Warming,
and Hemmings explore the origins of support for women in office in the Americas, focus-
ing on the role of pro-female stereotypes. As these authors illustrate, positive beliefs about
female leadership styles increase voters’ support for policies that will diversify government,
such as gender quotas. Finally, two pieces explore the role of racial identity in shaping pol-
itical attitudes and experiences. Taking a different approach to the concept of linked fate,
Schildkraut explores the importance of whiteness in shaping political attitudes. As has
often been found in studies of women, racial, and ethnic minorities, Schildkraut’s work
 POLITICS, GROUPS, AND IDENTITIES 3

indicates that linked fate is common among whites and has electoral consequences. Baum-
gartner, Epp, Shoub, and Love explore the treatment of blacks and whites in police stops in
North Carolina. Their data reveal that young men of color have been increasingly singled
out for more frequent searches and arrests, compared with other drivers. The final essays
in this issue explore how power, discrimination, and privilege are mapped onto racialized
bodies.
In the dialogues section, Thomas, Harrison, and Michelson and Block discuss different
approaches to the study of body politics. Harrison and Michelson explore the use of exper-
imental methodology to study the role of framing and priming in shaping attitudes toward
transgender bathroom access. Block’s essay discusses his work (with Haynes) examining
Michele Obama’s media image. Block and Haynes employ novel data drawn from different
polls and filmographies to identify media images and then use those images in controlled
experiments to identify which media frames increase voter support for Obama. Thomas
outlines queer sensibilities and methods, which he uses to analyze queer bodies, more
specifically a sculpture Charles Ray. The invited review essay, written by Mascagni,
explores movements that confront campus sexual violence. Centered on the case of
Brock Turner, a Sanford University student, Mascagni argues that blatant white suprema-
cist misogyny and respectability politics allow for certain perpetrators of sexual violence to
receive leniency. Taken together, these manuscripts explore how certain bodies are subject
to heightened and sustained scrutiny.

Notes
1. See Brownmiller (1975), Davis (1983), Dworkin (1974), Griffin (1978, 1979); and Rich
(1980).
2. See Fraser (1989) and Hartsock (1990) for critiques of Foucault’s conception of power.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

References
Brownmiller, S. 1975. Against Our Will. New York: Bantam.
Davis, A. 1983. Women, Race and Class. New York: Vintage.
Dworkin, A. 1974. Woman-Hating. New York: Dutton.
Foucault, M. 1977. “The Eye of Power.” In Power/Knowledge, edited by C. Gordon, 55–62.
New York, NY: Pantheon.
Fraser, N. 1989. “Foucault on Modern Power: Empirical Insights and Normative Confusion.” In
Unruly Practices: Power, Discourse and Gender in Contemporary Social Theory, edited by N.
Fraser, 73–94. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Griffin, S. 1978. Woman and Nature: The Roaring Inside Her. New York: Harper Colophon.
Griffin, S. 1979. Rape: The Power of Consciousness. New York: Harper & Row.
Hartsock, N. 1990. “Foucault on Power: A Theory for Women?” In Feminism/Postmodernism,
edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
Johnson, D. 1989. “The Body: Which One? Whose?” The Whole Earth Review, Summer, 6.
Rich, A. 1980. “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence.” Signs 5 (4): 631–660.
Zerilli, L. 1991. “Rememoration or War? French Feminist Narrative and the Politics of Self-
Representation.” Differences 3 (1): 1–19.