Book review: Sonya Surabhi Gupta (Editor), Subalternities in India and Latin America: Dalit Autobiographies and the Testimonio

Contemporary Voice of Dalit, Ahead of Print.
Sonya Surabhi Gupta (Editor), Subalternities in India and Latin America: Dalit Autobiographies and the Testimonio, London, Routledge, 2022, 228 pp., ₹995. ISBN: 978-0-367-36097-9 (Paperback)

Gendering Inter-caste Marriages: A Sociological and Anthropological Inquiry of Endogamy

Contemporary Voice of Dalit, Ahead of Print.
In Indian society, caste and gender are not mutually exclusive constructs. They coexist and are inseparable. India’s meteoric rise to becoming a nation least safe for women as Thomas Reuters reported in 2018, has its origins not only in patriarchy but also in casteism. This is most clearly visible with reference to the phenomenon of inter-caste marriages in India and the resulting perpetuation of atrocities on the inter-caste couple, and women have been the worst sufferers of this, since it is women’s bodies that has, since time immemorial, been the site of violence and discrimination. This can be corroborated by the fact that while Hindu scriptures has institutionalized inter-caste marriages, to a limited extent, by allowing anuloma marriages, it, in no way, allows for a pratiloma union. The anuloma marriages permit an alliance between a lower caste woman and a higher caste man, while the pratiloma form of marriage is an alliance between a higher caste woman and a lower caste man. The former is referred to as hypergamy and the latter as hypogamy. Thus, while caste discrimination and violence against women as distinct forms of oppression has garnered much attention, little sociological and anthropological research in the area of inter-caste marriage and its implications on women within the framework of religio-cultural, anthropological and sociological discourse, has come to the surface. The article focuses on fundamental prerequisites for a wholehearted acceptance of intermarriage.

United in misperception? How politicians and party electorates assess each other’s policy preferences

Party Politics, Ahead of Print.
For representation to work, voters and politicians need to know each other’s policy preferences. While we know that this may not be the case for voters, a growing body of research shows that politicians also regularly misperceive the position of the public or their party’s electorate. However, the two strands of literature are usually not linked, and there is a lack of studies that analyse the mutual (mis)perceptions of citizens and elites. To fill this gap, this paper uses data from three waves of the German Longitudinal Election Study to compare the mutual perceptions of candidates and their party electorates on the left-right scale and on three policy issues. Three findings are noteworthy: First, candidates are only slightly more accurate than voters. Second, in contrast to previous studies, there is no evidence of a conservative bias among politicians. Third, projection plays an important role in both voters’ and candidates' misperceptions. Where both groups think the others are is strongly influenced by their own preferences.