In this paper, I shall make the following propositions: in order to conceptually capture and represent the acts of political protest in a state of exception, we will need to reorient and supplement our representational apparatuses and also our theoretical frameworks for thinking about the gendered modes of protest under emergency laws and political abandonment. Through an analysis of the ‘naked protest’ of the Meira Peibis in Manipur, a ‘state of exception’ in democratic India, I shall argue that a series of supplementations to our current thinking on intersectionality, bare life and political subjectivation are required if we are to make sense of political acts of resistance, refusal and disavowal of the law of exception.
BoraP., 2010. Between the human, the citizen and the tribal: reading feminist politics in India's Northeast. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 12(3-4), pp. 341–360.
8.
ButlerJ., 2015. Notes Toward a Performative Theory of Assembly.Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.
9.
ChoS., CrenshawK.W., and McCallL., 2013. Toward a field of intersectionality studies: theory, applications, and praxis. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), pp. 785–810.
10.
CollinsP.H., and BilgeS., 2016. Intersectionality.Cambridge and Maiden: Polity Press.
11.
ComaroffJ., 2007. Beyond bare life: AIDS, (bio) politics, and the neoliberal order. Public Culture, 19(1), p. 197.
12.
CrenshawK., 1989. Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140(1), pp. 139–167.
EscobarA., 2007. Worlds and knowledges otherwise 1: the Latin American modernity/coloniality research program. Cultural Studies, 21(2-3), pp. 179–210.
15.
FoucaultM., 2004 [1977–1988]. Security, Territory, and Population: Lectures at the College De France 1977–1988, Tr. G. Burchell. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
16.
GolderB., 2015. Foucault and the Politics of Rights.Stanford: Stanford University Press.
17.
HenryM., 2017. Problematizing military masculinity, intersectionality and male vulnerability in feminist critical military studies. Critical Military Studies, 3(2), pp. 182–199.
18.
KikonD., 2009. The predicament of justice: fifty years of Armed Forces Special Powers Act in India. Contemporary South Asia, 17(3), pp. 271–282.
19.
LewisG., 2013. Unsafe travel: experiencing intersectionality and feminist displacements. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38(4), pp. 869–892.
20.
LokaneetaJ., 2017. Sovereignty, violence and resistance in North East India: mapping political theory today. Theory & Event, 20(1), pp. 76–86.
21.
LugonesM., 2007. Heterosexualism and the colonial/modern gender system. Hypatia, 22(1), pp. 186–219.
22.
LugonesM., 2010. Toward a decolonial feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), pp. 742–759.
23.
MadhokS., 2017. On vernacular rights cultures and the political imaginaries of haq. Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development, 8(3), pp. 485–509.
24.
MadhokS., PhillipsA., and WilsonK., eds. 2013. Gender, Agency, and Coercion.London: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
McCallL., 2005. The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(3), pp. 1771–1800.
26.
McNayL., 2014. The Misguided Search for the Political: Social Weightlessness in Radical Democratic Theory.Cambridge and Maiden: Polity Press.
27.
MendozaB., 2016. Coloniality of gender and power: from postcoloniality to decoloniality. In DischL., and HawkesworthM., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, pp. 1–24.
28.
MignoloW.D., 2012. Local Histories/Global Designs: Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), 2017 [1991]. The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016). New York and Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. Available at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/MinnesotaProtocol.pdf [last accessed 5 March 2018].
RancièreJ., 2004. Who is the subject of the Rights of Man?The South Atlantic Quarterly, 103(2), pp. 297–310.
35.
RancièreJ., 2010. Who is the subject of the Rights of Man? In J. Rancière Dissensus: On Politics and Aesthetics, Tr. Steven Corcoran. London and New York: Continuum, pp. 62–75.
36.
ReddyB.P.J., NakadeS.B., ShrivastavP.P., RaghavanV.R., and HazarikaS., 2005. Report of the Committee to Review the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958.New Delhi: Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Available at: http://notorture.ahrchk.net/profile/india/ArmedForcesActl958.pdf [last accessed 5 March 2018].
