Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article identifies a set of power relations within contemporary feminist academic debates on intersectionality that work to "depoliticizing intersectionality," neutralizing the critical potential of intersectionality for social justice-oriented change. At a time when intersectionality has received unprecedented international acclaim within feminist academic circles, a specifically disciplinary academic feminism in tune with the neoliberal knowledge economy engages in argumentative practices that reframe and undermine it. This article analyzes several specific trends in debate that neutralize the political potential of intersectionality, such as confining intersectionality to an academic exercise of metatheoretical contemplation, as well as "whitening intersectionality" through claims that intersectionality is "the brainchild of feminism" and requires a reformulated "broader genealogy of intersectionality."

Pursuing Intersectionality, Unsettling Dominant Imaginaries offers a sustained, interdisciplinary exploration of intersectional ideas, histories, and practices that no other text does. Deftly synthesizing much of the existing literatures on intersectionality, one of the most significant theoretical and political precepts of our time, May invites us to confront a disconcerting problem: though intersectionality is widely known, acclaimed, and applied, it is often construed in ways that depoliticize, undercut, or even violate its most basic premises. May cogently demonstrates how intersectionalit

The claim that intersectionality has become a dominant paradigm for feminist scholarship and activism constitutes the backdrop to this study. One central arena for making such claims is the genre of metacommentaries on intersectionality. This genre often responds critically to the development of intersectionality into a paradigm and focuses on how the dispersal of intersectionality into ever-new contexts carries with it a series of missteps and breakdowns. The paradigmatisation of intersectionality is seen as problematic: its successes lead to failures; its popularity to a loss of radical edge; its travels to uprooting. This critique instigates a form of storytelling that attempts to bring intersectionality back to where it belongs. In this study, three responses to the paradigmatisation of intersectionality are identified. All work to pin it down and shape it as a proper object: to define its meanings, connect with its roots and realise its potential. These responses are read as themselves contributing to paradigmatisation, positioning the genre of metacommentaries as both "against" and as an important part of this process. This thesis develops a critique of the gestures of correction inherent in the metacommentary responses. A central finding is that the construction of a proper form of intersectionality is contrasted against an improper other, known as "additivity", a way of conceptualising the relationship between social categories as separate and independent, making it possible to add them to each other. More importantly, additivity serves as a conceptual placeholder for a long list of methodological no-go areas, such as essentialism, exclusion and binary thinking. Thus, in the metacommentaries, a starkly oppositional relationship is constructed: through making additivity into a pejorative, intersectionality becomes an imperative. A paradoxical effect of overstating this binary is that it reinforces the very theory/practice gap that is singled out as causing missteps and breakdowns in intersectional scholarship. Instead of struggling to resolve the problem of additivity at a metatheoretical level, it is suggested that we need to dissolve the exceptionalism that guides the corrective impulse and to acknowledge our collective implication in additive modes of thought.

Introduction -- Identifying intersectionality -- Where does intersectionality come from? -- Intersectionality in everyday campus life -- Intersectionality and social identities : examining gender -- Exploring interlocking systems of oppression and privilege -- Intersectional approaches to social issues : the wealth gap, the care crisis, and black lives matter -- Conclusion: intersectionality and social justice

intersectionality as a paradigm has become increasingly popular at the English-speaking academy over the last 25 years. Here are a brief illustration of their conceptual origins and their connection with anti-hegemonic feminist theories. It is highlighted as originating in the framework of Critical Legal Studies in the US socio-legal context of the 70s. Intersectionality is presented as an analytical category to identify how the intersection of social structures (gender, sexuality, race, nationality, class, dis-ability) leads to complex situations of discrimination that are maintained and replicated at both structural, political and discursive levels. Finally, emphasis is placed on the potential of intersectionality as a tool to uncover the unintended effects of social exclusion replicated and reinforced by public law and policies and to include the substantive dimension of equality. ; Peer reviewed ; intersectionality as a paradigm has become increasingly popular at the English-speaking academy over the last 25 years. Here are a brief illustration of their conceptual origins and their connection with anti-hegemonic feminist theories. It is highlighted as originating in the framework of Critical Legal Studies in the US socio-legal context of the 70s. Intersectionality is presented as an analytical category to identify how the intersection of social structures (gender, sexuality, race, nationality, class, dis-ability) leads to complex situations of discrimination that are maintained and replicated at both structural, political and discursive levels. Finally, emphasis is placed on the potential of intersectionality as a tool to uncover the unintended effects of social exclusion replicated and reinforced by public law and policies and to include the substantive dimension of equality. ; La interseccionalidad como paradigma ha ganado popularidad creciente en la academia de habla anglosajona en los últimos veinticinco años. Se ilustran aquí brevemente sus orígenes conceptuales y su conexión con las teorías feministas ...

Debates about whether states can act intersectionally have resulted in mostly negative responses (Kantola and Nousiainen 2009; Koldinská 2009; Lombardo and Verloo 2009; Skjeie and Langvasbråten 2009; Squires 2008). Notably, most of the theorizing on this concern is situated within a European context in which scholars are grappling simultaneously with the questions of whether states can act intersectionally, and what intersectionality itself means within local contexts outside of its U.S. genesis. That is, scholars are asking both whether states can be committed to acting intersectionally and whether and how the theory travels in the first place. Similar concerns are relevant to the Latin American case, where, as is true for Europe, there is some promotion of intersectional action at the level of academic theorizing, state, and civil society, alongside some ambivalence about whether and how the concept is meaningful at the local level. States like Uruguay are open to fostering a more inclusive environment because of the commitment of its own state actors, what might be termed diffuse support at the international level, and the work of local actors who see the need—and some of whom have pushed for—greater insertion. But this openness is accompanied by a lack of clarity around, and ambivalence about, intersectionality even within the context of the state, much less among the organized community. I focus here on said ambivalence and the incomplete elaboration of intersectionality within the National Women's Institute (Inmujeres), which is exemplified by distinct approaches to intersectionality within the Institution, distinct approaches to the question of difference, and a lack of civil society insertion.

Resumen: La interseccionalidad como paradigma ha ganado popularidad creciente en la academia de habla anglosajona en los últimos veinticinco años. Se ilustran aquí brevemente sus orígenes conceptuales y su conexión con las teorías feministas contra-hegemónicas. Se destaca como se originó en el marco de los Critical Legal Studies en el contexto socio-jurídico estadounidense de los años 70. La interseccionalidad se presenta como categoría analítica para identificar de qué manera la intersección de las estructuras sociales (género, sexualidad, raza, nacionalidad, clase, dis-capacidad) genera situaciones de discriminación complejas que se mantienen y reproducen tanto en el nivel estructural, como político y discursivo. Se insiste finalmente en el potencial de la interseccionalidad como herramienta para desvelar los efectos indeseados de exclusión social reproducidos y reforzados por el derecho y las políticas públicas e incluir la dimensión sustantiva de la igualdad. Palabras clave: Interseccionalidad, Igualdad, Discriminación múltiple, Género, Sexualidad, Raza, Nacionalidad, Clase, Dis-capacidad. Abstract: Intersectionality is a paradigm that gained increasing popularity in the Anglo-Saxon scholarship for the past twenty-five years. Its conceptual genealogy and its connection with counter-hegemonic feminist theories are briefly illustrated here. It is described how intersectionality originated within the framework of Critical Legal Studies in the US socio-legal context of the 1970s. Intersectionality is presented as an analytical category to identify how the intersection of social structures (gender, sexuality, race, nationality, class and dis-ability) generates complex situations of discrimination that are maintained and reproduced at the structural, political and discursive levels. It finally emphasizes the potential of intersectionality as a tool to uncover of social exclusion unintentionally reproduced and reinforced by law and public policies and include the substantive dimension of equality. Keywords: Intersectionality, Equality, Multiple Discrimination, Gender, Sexuality, Race, nationality, Class, Dis-ability.doi: https://doi.org/10.20318/eunomia.2017.3651