Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-z9l2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-09-08T21:07:31.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Coverture and Dignity: A Comment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Hendrik Hartog
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This short comment challenges efforts to expand the notion of a dignity taking to traditional legal structures, like those identified with “coverture.” It suggests that the inequalities of gender oppression are better understood as forms of “slow violence.” It also suggests how difficult it is to imagine and to institute remedies for wrongs rooted in long histories and in powerful structures of socialization.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , Fall 2016 , pp. 833 - 840
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Atuahene, Bernadette. 2014. We Want What's Ours: Learning from South Africa's Land Restitution Program. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Blackstone, William. 1976. Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 1, ed. William Carey Jones, 443–445. Baton Rouge, LA: Claitor's Publishing Division.Google Scholar
Clark, Elizabeth B. 1987. Religion, Rights, and Difference in the Early Woman's Rights Movement. Wisconsin Women's Law Journal 3:29–58.Google Scholar
Clark, Elizabeth B. 1990. Matrimonial Bonds: Slavery and Divorce in Nineteenth‐Century America. Law and History Review 8:25–54.Google Scholar
Coates, Ta‐Nihisi. 2014. The Case for Reparations. Atlantic June.Google Scholar
Cott, Nancy F. 2001. Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hartmann, Heidi. 1987. Changes in Women's Economic and Family Roles in the Post‐World War II United States. In Women, Households, and the Economy, ed. Lourdes Beneria and Catherine Stimpson, 33–64. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Hartog, Hendrik. 2000a. Man and Wife in America, a History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hartog, Hendrik. 2000b. Wives as Favorites. In Law as Culture and Culture as Law: Essays in Honor of John Phillip Reid, ed. Hartog, Hendrik and Nelson, William E., 292–321. Madison, WI: Madison House Publishers.Google Scholar
Kahn, Suzanne. 2015. Divorce and the Politics of the American Social Welfare Regime, 1969–2001. PhD diss., Columbia University.Google Scholar
Kerber, Linda K. 1980. Women of the Republic. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Kerber, Linda K. 1992. The Paradox of Women's Citizenship in the Early Republic: The Case of Martin v. Massachusetts, 1805. American Historical Review 97:349–78.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, Alan. 1986. Marriage and Love in England. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nixon, Rob. 2013. Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Carol. 2000. Property and Expropriation: Themes and Variations in American Law. Utah Law Review 2000:1–38.Google Scholar
Rothman, Ellen K. 1987. Hands and Hearts, a History of Courtship in American. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.Google Scholar
Sachs, Albert Louis, and Wilson, Joan Hoff. 1978. Sexism and the Law: A Study of Male Beliefs and Legal Bias in Britain and the United States. Oxford: M. Robertson.Google Scholar
Salmon, Marylynn. 1986. Women and the Law of Property in Early America. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar