Lecture 6 Flashcards
Article: Intersectionality: Debate in two areas: Is it a theory or a method? Is it about oppression and inequality or oppression inequality and privilege
Theory
Debate:
Structural inequality and oppression of Black women
Crenshaw: showed limitations of one-dimensional identity
- -> Experienced oppressions of black women
- -> Or
Recognize both oppression and privilege
Method
Lutz: particularly helpful in detection the overlapping of visible, at first sight, invisible strands of inequality especially when it includes different levels.
Takes into account variety of power context
From theory to method
Shift from how structures of racism, class and sexism determine individuals and practices to how individuals ongoingly and flexibly negotiated their multiple
What is intersectionality? Characteristics
A way to study and understand processes of exclusion and inclusion and identity construction.
–> Broadens our understanding of processes of injustice and oppression which in turns gives insight into what is necessary to create inclusion therefore contributing to diversity.
Axes of differences, axes of structural oppresion, identity markers
Lutz’s uses Matsuda’s “the other question” to facilitate and complicate an intersectional analysis
Intersectionality assumes
You cannot assume beforehand what axes of difference is the most significant.
–> Impact on social positioning can be extremely dissimilar.
Individuals are not in all situations multiply vulnerable.
- -> They can resist
- -> They can be privileged
- Some situations from some axes of difference
Categories are not homogenous, differences can exists within categories --> Gender becomes differentiated when studied in relaxation to class or race.
Reject the naturalization of any construction of social divisions and challenge prioritization of any of them such as class and gender.
The importance of context and situationality (must be discovered cannot be assumed)
Gender and sexuality
Guess who’s coming to dinner: 1967 movie (some states interracial marriage still illegal)
broke open the discussion concerning interracial marriage. Different actors in the movie were against it.
Issues have changed regarding who can do it with whom.
Shifts regarding relationships and race and ethnicity and sexuality
What is considered acceptable sex has shifted
Have we become more inclusive?
Brings other questions to the fore:
–> how are race and sexuality co-constituted contemporarily (for whom, where, when)
The happy marriage: Gender and sexuality as an extensoin of each other
One’s gender conformed to their sexuality and one’s sexuality conformed to their gender.
You can imagine that the conceptualisation of difference was limited
Eventually difference recognized as an important analytical tool however gay and lesbian studies rooted in the mid-late eighties.
little connection btweeen hetero studies and gay and lesbian studies
Divorcing on good terms:
Autonomous separation of gender and sexuality:
- gender and sexuality become two different analytical constructs
Two different developments contributed to the recognition:
- -> the recognition of the third gender
- -> The upcome of HIV/aids.
Non-binary individuals in societies:
–> Hijra (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh)
–> Muxa (mexico)
Two spirited people (Native American)
Sworn Virgins (Balkans and Albania) Indonesia, Thailand, Samoa, Hawai
Could no longer assume that gender and sexuality conformed to each other
Research what they mean autonomously and how they inform each other
The upcome of HIV/AIDS : 1980
The discovery of HIV and AIDS as a pandemic disease
Need to know more about sexual behavior
More funds for sex studies
Quickly apparent that studying knowledge, attitudes was not enough
Sex was embedded in culture and to study sex necessary to study sexual culture
In short (J. Marchank 2007)
Gender is a social construct
There exist in each and every society hegemonic notions of gender roles, yet each of these is adaptable and open to adaptation
Women in the main have lesser power than men, and some men have less power than others. –> hegemonic masculinity
Gender is not expressed, experienced or performed separately from other social identities such as ethnicity, nationality, sexuality amongst ithers
- -> intersectionality
- -> implies that gender is only one of the demarcation of the difference
Sexuality: Gayle rubin 1982
Has its own internal politics, inequities and modes of oppression,
The concrete institutional forms of sexuality at any given time and place are products of human activity
A radical theory o
–> the sex hierarchy: the charmed circle vs. The outer limits
Sexuality is…
A multi-layered concept includes space for the analysis of:
Sexual ideologies, discourses and imageries
Sexual meanings produced by different actors such as religious or state institutions.
Study interactions between individuals in different positions of power in different locations: men and women in the workplace, at home, in recreation
The sexual meanings in a diversity of relationships such as flirting, sexual harassment, abuse or violence and pleasure
Dynamics of sexual practices and attitudes
Subjective layer in which men and women are conceptualized as sexual subject, have sexual preferences
Sexual identities
Pleasure
In sum
The divorce of gender from sexuality:
- -> no longer can assume what gender and sexuality means
- -> must research how these two stand in relation to each other
The “discovery” by academics of the third gender:
- -> no longer can assume that gender and sexuality conform to each other
- -> open to the study of gender and sexuality as non-binary –> not just sexuality that is non-binary but gender too.
The possibility for gender and sexuality studies to be more inclusive
Genders and sexualities are both relaitons of power
Heteronormativity
Just like hegemonic masculinities, heteronormativity problematizes the dominant position of heteresexuality in society
“heteronormativity points at the everyday and mundane ways in which heterosecxyality is privileged and taken for granted, that is normalized and naturalized” ( herz and johannesen 2015)
- -> relation with Rubin’s sexual hierarchy
- -> Heterosexual identity as naturalized
- -> PHD on heterosexuality
Everyday heterosexuality is not simply about sex, but is perpetuated by the regulation of marriage and family life, divisions of waged and domestic labour, patterns of economic support and dependency (Jackson, 1999)
–> Heteronormativity is institutionalized
FOr e.g. divorce became legal in CHile in 2004, and in 2015 Philippines was the last country in the work where divorce is illegal.
Legislation can regulate sexuality, abortion, homosexuality (Kenya and Etiopie) sex work criminalized
So heteronormativity is not just about heterosexuality but it is also about gender
- what is appropriate behavior, identity, appearance, attitude, lifestyle
- Privileges and sanctions and can codemn people based on the presumed binaries of gender and sexuality
- -> marginalization of different groupsL sex workers LGBTQ+,
- — individueals who do not fit in or uphold the binary
- — transgression cross the boundaries of what is good, what is proper, what is expected
The importance of studying heterosexuality from a intersectional perspective
Importance of study the unmarked, whiteness, heterosexuality and masculinity
Dean says: through studying the dominant, we are able to both understand and give accounts of how normative identities are socially constructed processes situation within a socio-historical context. …. one is not only able to give an account of their privileges, structural advantages and discursive location, but also use the focus on the majority and dominant to understand their relationship to the minority and subordinate.
By studying heterosexualities, we are better able to understand the processes of forming homosexuals identities, communities and politics of homosexual resistance and accomodation.
There are two ways to look at intersectionality:
As a theory -> first used within the debate of structural inequality and oppression of black women. Crenshaw showed the limitations of one-dimensional identity. It recognizes both oppression and privilege.
As a method -> Lutz asserts intersectionality as particularly helpful in detecting overlapping of visible, at first sight, invisible strands of inequality, especially when it includes different levels (e.g. institutional level, subjective level etc).
a. Takes variety of power context into account
From theory to method:
A shift from how structures of racism, class & sexism determine individuals and practices to how individuals ongoingly and flexibly negotiate their multiple and converging identities in the context of everyday life
Characteristics of intersectionality
A way to study and understand processes of exclusion, inclusion and identity construction -> it broadens our understanding of processes of injustice and oppression which in turn gives insight into what is necessary to create inclusion and therefore it contributes to diversity
Axes of differences (gender, race, sexuality, socioeconomic class), axes of structural oppression, identity markers
Lutz uses Matsuda’s (1991) “the other question” (when looking at a specific situation pertaining to gender, the other questions would be: what does class have to do with this, what does to colour have to do with this situation?) facilitate and to complicate an intersectional analysis -> e.g. when I see something that looks racist, I ask “where is the patriachy in this?, when I see something that looks homophobic, I ask “where are the class interests in this?”
Assumptions in intersectionality
You cannot assume beforehand what axes of difference is the most significant -> impact on social positioning can be extremely dissimilar
Individuals are not in all situations multiply vulnerable -> they can resist, they can be privileged (some situations from some axes of difference)
Categories are not homogenous, differences can exist within categories -> gender becomes differentiated when studied in relation to class or race
Rejection of the naturalization of any construction of social divisions and challenges prioritization of any of them such as class and gender
The importance of context and situationality (must be discovered, cannot be assumed) What does an intersectional analysis tell us about artificial intelligence? -> Intersectionality is important to study as black women (gender & race) are not recognized by AI.
Gender & sexuality
Changes in gender / sexuality: first seen as a happy marriage
How are race & sexuality co-constituted contemporarily? (for whom, where, when?)
Gender and sexuality as an extension of each other
One’s gender conformed to their sexuality and one’s sexuality conformed to their gender
The conceptualisation of difference was limited -> eventually difference is recognized as an important analytic tool
However, gay & lesbian studies rooted in mid-late eighties
Divorcing on good terms: autonomous seperation of gender & sexuality
Gender and sexuality become two different analytical constructs because of the discovery of the third gender/non-binary.
Two different developments contributed to this recognition:
The recognition of the third gender
The upcome of HIV/AIDS
Non-binary individuals in different societies
Hijra (India, Pakistan & Bangladesh)
Muxa (Mexico)
Two-spirited people (Native American)
Sworn Virgins (Balkans, Albania)
Indonesia, Thailand, Samoa, Hawaii etc.
Dean (2010) - Thinking Intersectionality: Sexualities and the Politics of Multiple Identities
By studying heterosexualities, we are better able to understand the processes of forming homosexual identities, communities and the politics of homosexual resistance and accomodation.
Studies the unmarked make visible the normative and privileged roles whiteness, masculinites and heterosexualities play in everyday life and social institutions.
Identity politics in three phases:
The notion of sexual idenitity as the basis of a unique and unitary group identity
The critique of the unitary and singular notions of the prior phase
Inspired by poststructural theories, the argument that all identity categories (singular and multiple) as falsifying, fictional and saturated with power relations.
Heterosexual masculinities are the unmarked catefory of heterosexuality -> unmarked categories: whiteness, masculinities, heterosexualities.
Conclusion: heteronormativity remains a dominant principle of organization in the state, healthcare agencies, private industries and even popular culture. Homosexuality has been demedicalized and there have been important legal changes decriminalizing sodomy and promulgating (enacting/making known) pro-gay domestic partner beneits, adoption rights and anti-discrimination ordinances, making gay and lesbians a growing and visible growing minority presence in North America’s social institutions.
Heterosexuality may still be normativiely and institutionally enforced, it is no longer compulsory.
Overt acts of homophobia are becoming increasingly socially unacceptable. However, heterosexuals do employ hegemonic and normative gender practices to indicate their heterosexuality.
Intersectionality scholarship
brought focus to the importance of multiple identity categories
interdefining identities constitute important standpoints for knowing, experiencing and analyzing the social world
exploring the value of marking the unmarked
Lutz (2015) - Intersectionality as Method
Kathy Davis (2008): intersectionality is a theory that offers new potential and perspectives for the connectivity of a broad range of social science scholars’ approaches.
Walgenbach (2010): intersectionality is a new paradigm for the scientific community as it offers a set of terms, theoretical interventions, premises, problem definitions and suggested solutions.
Klinger & Knapp (2003): embrace intersectionality’s potential for the building of “grand” theory byt argue that on the structural level, the term is unable to identify how and by what means race, class & gender as seperate categories are constituted as social categories. Moreover, they are concerned with intersectionalists’ tendency to let of “gender” as a master category by declaring that no category is sacrosanct.
Lutz (2015) herself considers intersectionality a heuristic device or a method that is particularly helpful in detecting the overlapping and co-construction of visible, and at first sight, invisible strands of inequality, especially when the analysis includes various levels. Main added level is that intersectionality enables to take variety in power contexts into account.
Floya Anthias (1998): a multi-level analysis works on four levels
the level of discrimination (experience)
the actors’ level (intersubjective praxis)
the institutional level (institutional regimes)
the level of representation (symbolic & discursive)
Kathy Davis (2014):
within feminist research, it needs to be complicated as gender cannot be the theoretical standalone category as it is always and everywhere related to other differences and mutually constituted by these differences -> refers back to Matsuda’s the other question: it avoids 1) the narrow focus on one category and 2) the mentioning of multiple differences without taking them into account
The other questions functions as a directive to focus on varous levels of analysis
- It is crucial to reflect on partiality -> differences in situatedness when two people are involved in an interview in a qualitive study, these differences can include class, race, ethnicity, age, gender, nationality, able-bodiedness, religion. It is important to explore intersectionality on the level of the narrator and the level of the analyst
- It is important to notice that intervviewees highlight gender, race/ethnicity, class, age at certain moments in the narration in connection with certain experiences or phass in their lives.
- Intersectionality on the level of power relations is a crucial subject of analysis -> we can shift attention away from how the structures of racism, class discrimination and sexism determine individuals’ identities and practices to how individuals ongoingly and flexibly negotriate multiple and converging identities in the context of everyday life
