Reading the State as a Multi-Identity Formation: The Touch and Feel of Equality Governance

Abstract

How does a sense of touch, figuratively and practically, get deployed within equality governance, and to what questions and ways of thinking about the state does this direct us? Taking 2009-2010 as a snap-shot moment in the development of British equality reform-the year leading up to passage of the Equality Act 2010-this article explores the relationship between touch (the haptic) and equality governance from three angles. First, how have governmental bodies used touch language and imagery, including in geometrical representations of disadvantage? Second, what other, more challenging encounters and actions are imaginable; specifically, can touch mobilise the feeling state as a critical form of active citizenship? Third, what re-conceptualisations of the state does the touching, feeling state invoke, and with what effects? Specifically, does conceiving of the state as a multi-identity formation reframe the risks associated with a haptic state, thereby opening up new strategies for political action?

Post-bureaucratic encounters: Affective labour in public employment services

“…We conclude that employment agents develop an affective ‘practical sense’ (Bourdieu, 1998) for their task: that the public workforce consists of ‘activated activators’, subjectivated by technologies of power and emotionologies, which they incorporate and embody. However, neoliberal governmentality has to be understood as a subtle way to exercise power: a ‘touching’ state emerges (Cooper, 2011), an “affective state” (Penz and Sauer, 2016: ch. 6; Stoler, 2004; Jupp et al, 2016), close to the citizens, but also governing ‘from a distance’ by affecting citizens as customers and by making citizens responsible for their own lives – a less protective and less redistributive state therefore.…”

“We’re not there yet” but it’s not “pie-in-the-sky”: Legal Consciousness, Decertification and the Equality Sector in England and Wales

“…The paper also explores legal consciousness through its relationship to touch. Whilst a rich interdisciplinary literature exists on touch, particularly within cultural studies (e.g., Sedgwick 2003;Ahmed 2004Ahmed , 2014Coleman 2020), its usefulness for thinking about law and governance has been less frequently mined (notable exceptions include Grabham 2009;Cooper 2011). Indeed, touch is a surprisingly underexplored theme in the legal consciousness literature and meta-stories of law generally.…”

“…Meanwhile, touch's effect may be haptic and/or it may evoke an emotional response or 'affect'. A particularly important facet of the reciprocity of touch for the purposes of this paper is the impression left, or perceived to be left, on others by touching the law or law reform in a particular way (see Cooper 2011Cooper , 2019.…”

“…On analysing the interview data, legal consciousness emerged as an important theme. Building on previous research on British equality governance (Cooper 1995(Cooper , 2011Conley and Page 2017), this paper contributes to the 'bureaucratic' strand of the literature, which examines the legal consciousness of people engaged in the governmental and administrative work of interpreting and applying law on the ground, including the political challenges of governing in the face of disliked law (Cooper 1995). To date, the bureaucratic literature has mostly focused on how front-line workers (and sometimes more senior officers) understand and implement the law in case-by-case decision-making, such as homelessness housing applications (Cowan 2004;Hunter et al 2016) and asylum appeals (Richards 2015).…”

Gastropolitical encounters and the political life of sensation

“…The senses aid in exemplifying political relationships and connections, directing us to particular aspects of political form and practice (cf. Cooper, 2011). This article therefore serves as a critical instigation of combining analytical approaches from sociology, anthropology, diplomacy, and food and foodways (cf.…”