{"title":"这个项目","authors":"Shreya Atrey","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 1 inaugurates the project by setting out the current status of intersectionality in discrimination laws across jurisdictions, including the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, and India, and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and international human rights treaty bodies. Although each jurisdiction’s tryst with intersectionality has been unique, the survey concludes by pointing out the similarities between the continuing legislative and judicial struggles in redressing intersectional discrimination successfully. This prepares the stage for the current intervention. The chapter goes on to define the central argument of this work and the parameters within which it unfolds. In particular, it explains the choice of comparative jurisdictions and the wide range of materials employed in making a case for intersectional discrimination.","PeriodicalId":115138,"journal":{"name":"Intersectional Discrimination","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Project\",\"authors\":\"Shreya Atrey\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chapter 1 inaugurates the project by setting out the current status of intersectionality in discrimination laws across jurisdictions, including the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, and India, and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and international human rights treaty bodies. Although each jurisdiction’s tryst with intersectionality has been unique, the survey concludes by pointing out the similarities between the continuing legislative and judicial struggles in redressing intersectional discrimination successfully. This prepares the stage for the current intervention. The chapter goes on to define the central argument of this work and the parameters within which it unfolds. In particular, it explains the choice of comparative jurisdictions and the wide range of materials employed in making a case for intersectional discrimination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":115138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Intersectional Discrimination\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Intersectional Discrimination\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intersectional Discrimination","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198848950.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Chapter 1 inaugurates the project by setting out the current status of intersectionality in discrimination laws across jurisdictions, including the US, UK, South Africa, Canada, and India, and in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and international human rights treaty bodies. Although each jurisdiction’s tryst with intersectionality has been unique, the survey concludes by pointing out the similarities between the continuing legislative and judicial struggles in redressing intersectional discrimination successfully. This prepares the stage for the current intervention. The chapter goes on to define the central argument of this work and the parameters within which it unfolds. In particular, it explains the choice of comparative jurisdictions and the wide range of materials employed in making a case for intersectional discrimination.