2021
DOI: 10.1177/09075682211021748
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Precarity and the question of children’s relationalities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
6
0
3

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
6
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…These endogenous ideas of mutuality, reciprocity and collective life inform the values and valuations of personhood as much as they shape notions of good childhood. They resonate with what Balagopalan (2021: p. 329) refers to as “non-sovereign relationalities” whereby precarious children’s existence, interconnectedness and care find expressions in relationalities whose given-ness appears to exceed autonomous and individuated understanding of selfhood opening avenues to reimagine a more collective and socially just world.…”
Section: Relational Epistemologies – and Indigenous Views On Childhoodssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…These endogenous ideas of mutuality, reciprocity and collective life inform the values and valuations of personhood as much as they shape notions of good childhood. They resonate with what Balagopalan (2021: p. 329) refers to as “non-sovereign relationalities” whereby precarious children’s existence, interconnectedness and care find expressions in relationalities whose given-ness appears to exceed autonomous and individuated understanding of selfhood opening avenues to reimagine a more collective and socially just world.…”
Section: Relational Epistemologies – and Indigenous Views On Childhoodssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…The potential of this revolutionary comprehension of citizenship lies in the recognition of the struggles that children perceive in the victims of the armed conflict, thus moving from an adultist to a childist comprehension of national belonging (Wall, 2013) based on relational identity with the historically marginalized. This notion of a non-sovereign self (Balagopalan, 2021;Kelz, 2016) tears from traditional understandings of protracted violence as stifling and reshapes them into a binding relationship with the precarious other. The emphasis is no longer on respecting individual autonomy, historically belonging to the adult, white, middle-class man (or the corrupt elite), but on solidarity with the othered collectivities, where everyone, including children, are competent, resilient, and active citizens.…”
Section: Revolutionary Understandings Of Lived Citizenshipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Violeta's intervention discloses the necessity to "suffer for the other" and characterizes "our hurt" as relational. It allows us to see that children's citizenship is cemented on notions of interdependency echoing Balagopalan's (2021) arguments regarding children's embodied understandings of non-sovereign relationalities that allow them to "refuse, neoliberalism's subjective and penalizing technologies" (p. 330)."…”
Section: Revolutionary Understandings Of Lived Citizenshipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the ways that, in their focus on futurity within a neoliberal conceptualization of time as linear and progressive, both these positionings were engaging in a double manoeuvre of obscuring childhood and activism in the present, reinscribing still dominant modernist (and adultist) positionings of children as other-to adults (Balagopalan, 2021;Millei, 2021;Raby & Sheppard, 2021). But I wanted to consider how activist children were positioning themselves through and within their activism.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%