			Home About us Contact

Personal Property (personal + property)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Humanities and Social Sciences	83%

Selected Abstracts

Rituals of Death as a Context for Understanding Personal Property in Socialist Mongolia

THE JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL INSTITUTE, Issue 1 2002
Caroline Humphrey
This article proposes that we rethink the concept of ,personal property', and it uses the example of Mongolian rituals of death in the socialist 1980s as a context for exploring this idea. These rituals are not the occasion for dividing up property amongst inheritors (this has usually been agreed upon long before death) but involve a series of actions that specify the deceased's relations with material things. Objects become personal property through prolonged use and physical interaction. The rites are concerned with the deceased's relations with such things, focused on desire, relinquishment, dependence, and other emotions. The article thus shifts attention back to the ,person-thing' aspect of property. It also discusses the socio-political contexts in which such a relation becomes important and argues that socialist society did not eliminate but rather opened up contexts in which such personalization could occur. It is argued more generally that personal property so situated is quite different from the ,private property' that is so prominent in capitalist society. This in turn requires us to rethink the way that ,possession' may be imagined, and to consider forms of property that are conceptualized more in terms of human attachment to objects than as exclusionary relations vis-à-vis other owners. The Mongolian ethnography suggests that, just as people alter material things by long and intensive interaction with them, there are categories of personal property that also change their owners, since actions of using, giving up, donation, and so forth are ethical matters that transform the person. [source]

On NCATE Standards and Culture at Work: Conversations, Hegemony, and (Dis-)Abling Consequences

ANTHROPOLOGY & EDUCATION QUARTERLY, Issue 1 2007
Hervé Varenne
Many are unaware of the power of the NCATE standards for the accreditation of schools of education. In this article, I first trace the development of the political authority of these standards, and their imposition on hundreds of schools of education. I then focus on the discourse of these standards, particularly the emphasis on "knowledge, skills and dispositions" as personal properties to control. I conclude with a call to highlight the struggles in which all involved are engaged. [source]

Women's human rights violations: Cameroonian students' perceptions

JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY & APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 2 2009
Raul Kassea
Abstract Cameroonian university students (N,=,666) assessed whether certain different societal positions that the law grants to women and men (the husband chooses the marital home, the husband wields parental power, a married woman cannot freely engage in trade, the husband administers his wife's personal property) and certain cultural practices (female genital mutilation, parents arranging their children's marriage) were seen as violations of women's human rights. Justifications for the choices were also analysed. Female genital mutilation was most often seen as a violation of women's human rights, and the husband selecting the marital home was least often seen as a violation. These differences were explained by cultural specificities. Women more often than men saw the cases as violations of rights. Respondents coming from the North saw the cases less often as violations of rights than respondents from other geocultural areas, which was in accordance with their previously observed higher collectivism. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source]

A New Right to Property: Civil War Confiscation in the Reconstruction Supreme Court

JOURNAL OF SUPREME COURT HISTORY, Issue 3 2004
DANIEL W. HAMILTON
During the Civil War, both the Union Congress and the Confederate Congress put in place sweeping confiscation programs designed to seize the private property of enemy citizens on a massive scale. Meeting in special session in August 1861, the U.S. Congress passed the First Confiscation Act, authorizing the federal government to seize the property of those participating directly in the rebellion.1 The Confederate Congress retaliated on August 30, 1861, passing the Sequestration Act.2 This law authorized the Confederate government to forever seize the real and personal property of "alien enemies," a term that included every U.S. citizen and all those living in the Confederacy who remained loyal to the Union. [source]