This sensitivity to the impact of governing categories was reflected in my 1996 book, The Politics of Affirmative Action, which developed the notion of “category politics”.
In fact, you could say that being called ‘high risk’ was not a way to make you feel relaxed about your pregnancy” (Bacchi 2003: 3). … I tried to deny the implications of being labelled ‘high risk’, but we shouldn’t ignore the impact of medical diagnoses on our psyche. “Being of a certain age for your first child means that you are automatically considered a high-risk pregnancy. In my 2003 memoir, entitled Fear of Food: A Diary of Mothering (Spinifex Press), I reflected on the repercussions of being classified as an “elderly primigravida” when I became pregnant at age forty-four: Notice how I’ve already taken on two categories, and I have only just begun!Īllow me to digress briefly.
It leaves me immunocompromised (immunosuppressed). I intend to consider these issues alongside a narrative of my own experiences to indicate the power and influence of governing categories. The categories I wish to target are interconnected: “underlying health conditions”, “at-risk populations”, “vulnerable groups”, “hospitalization with COVID as distinct from hospitalization from COVID”. Specifically, I wish to reflect on dominant people categories and their governing effects, including lived and subjectification effects (see WPR question 5 Bacchi and Goodwin 2016: 20). I felt compelled to say something about modes of governing COVID-19 that are currently (Jan – Feb 2022) being practised. I apologize for breaking the flow of promised Research Hub entries, but such is the nature of the times. “Becoming More Mortal”: governing through “risk”, “vulnerability” and “underlying health conditions”
0 kommentar(er)
