Abstract
Abstract Based on Agamben’s assertions (1998) refugees are often compared to ‘bare life’ (homo sacer) without any political agency. They are considered to be outside the purview of national or international legal and yet at its mercy for survival. For refugee women, this stripping of their autonomy stereotypes them as reproductive vessels in need of chivalrous protection within the larger refugee discourse. Policy projects frequently regard them as ‘vulnerable populations’ in need of assistance. Given this theoretical framework, the present study contextualizes the life of Rohingya women prior to displacement and as refugees in India. It aims to assess the de jure and de facto rights of these women through the process of displacement. Moving beyond rigid assertions, this study postulates that refugeehood does not mean a complete absence of decision-making spaces for Rohingya women nor does it in any way mean a sudden disappearance of their sufferings. It focuses on their experiences as women and steers clear of homogenizing their narratives as refugees.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
