As a political movement inspired by a belief in fundamental equality and committed to eradication of embodied injustices, feminists have illuminated the politics of exclusion—the use of law and policy to grant rights, opportunities, privileges, and immunities to particular elite men while denying them to marginalized others. With the theorization of gender as an analytical category, feminist scholars have investigated how manifold policies have discursively produced hierarchies of citizenship structured by gender, race, and sexuality. This chapter provides an overview of (...) feminist contributions to policy studies, including key critiques of mainstream policy scholarship, an examination of feminist policy interventions and their mixed results ranging from attempts to eradicate sex discrimination in law and policy, the creation of women’s policy agencies, and the shift to gender mainstreaming. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the politics of equality, comparing nondiscrimination and equal opportunity approaches with structural and substantive conceptions of equality. (shrink)

Social sciences seek to understand and explain human existence in all its complexity. Thus they encompass the study of individual consciousness and behavior, social relations and cultural practices, social systems, and structural forces. Investigations of these diverse phenomena proceed in accordance with modes of inquiry sanctioned by the academic disciplines of anthropology, archaeology, cultural studies, economics, geography, history, political science, psychology, sociology, and women's studies.

ABSTRACT The criteria for adequate explanation have been the subject of intense debate in the philosophy of social science. This paper examines a variety of explanations of a decade of violence in Kampuchea in order to clarify the dimensions of the Kampuchean tragedy and to challenge both the hypothetico‐deductive and the Verstehen models of explanation central to contemporary debates in the philosophy of social science. Using the Kampuchean case as an example, I suggest that the analyst's propensity to assimilate new (...) information into a tacit, pre‐supposition‐laden conceptual framework contributes to an oversimplification or caricature of the event to be explained. For this reason, no individual explanation of an event can be definitive. An adequate explanation can emerge only from the juxtaposition of and extrapolation from multiple, non‐privileged interpretations representing different methodological and ideological perspectives on the socio‐political event to be explained. (shrink)