In this article we ask what it means for sociologists to practice intersectionality as a theoretical and methodological approach to inequality. What are the implications for choices of subject matter and style of work? We distinguish three styles of understanding intersectionality in practice: group-centered, process-centered, and systemcentered. The first, emphasizes placing multiply-marginalized groups and their perspectives at the center of the research. The second, intersectionality as a process, highlights power as relational, seeing the interactions among variables as multiplying oppressions at various points of intersection, and drawing attention to unmarked groups. Finally, seeing intersectionality as shaping the entire social system pushes analysis away from associating specific inequalities with unique institutions, instead looking for processes that are fully interactive, historically co-determining, and complex. Using several examples of recent, highly regarded qualitative studies, we draw attention to the comparative, contextual, and complex dimensions of sociological analysis that can be missing even when race, class, and gender are explicitly brought together.

Black Feminist Thought is grounded in the experiences of African American women yet it does not stop there. . . . I also hoped that my ideas would travel beyond U.S. borders, not as yet another American export to the rest of the world, but rather as part of the beginnings of a dialogue with similarly subordinated groups in a global context as well as all those who wish to build vibrant, multiethnic societies.Patricia Hill Collins ( 2009), in the preface to the Korean translation of Black Feminist Thought What happens when Black Feminist Thought travels beyond the borders of the United States? What elements are necessary for the creation of a cross-border dialogue about intersectionality? In this essay I chart the book's journey from the perspective of a junior sociologist who both participated in this travel as a translator and strives to utilize intersectional theory and frameworks in a transnational context. I am honored to share what the scholarship of Patricia Hill Collins has meant to me and fellow diasporic feminist researchers who are "outsiders within" North American academia. Furthermore, I discuss the process of translating and publishing Black Feminist Thought in South Korea, and offer my thoughts about bringing intersectional and transnational feminist analyses into a fruitful dialogue with one another.My initial encounter with Collins's work occurred during my first semester as a graduate student in sociology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I was assigned to read Collins's article on the significance of Black feminist thought (1986), along with the work of Chandra Mohanty, in the required sociological theory course-although only in the final week, which focused on "non-canonical" theory. I was immediately struck by the article's encouragement to learn to "trust [one's] own personal and cultural biographies as significant sources of knowledge" (Collins 1986, 529). After that first encounter, "When in doubt, read Collins" became my 40

This article explores the gendered construction of South Korean citizenship through the lens of North Korean settlers' experiences in South Korea. Drawing on ethnographic research, the author delves into the citizen-making process, critically examining the impact of gendered modernizing projects on North Korean settlers' daily lives. North Korean settlers are expected to get rid of their ethnic markers and transform themselves into modern citizen-subjects of South Korea. The author demonstrates that the overall frame of perception of North Korean settlers is deeply gendered, with modernity as a powerful ethnic marker. The notion of ethnicized citizenship in the context of two Koreas offers a concrete account of how ethnicities are created and employed in stratified structure of citizenship.

This article offers an integrative review of the literature on women's migration for domestic work and cross‐border marriages in East and Southeast Asia. By bringing these two bodies of literature into dialogue, we illuminate the interconnected processes that shape two key forms of women's migration that are embedded in the reproduction of women's domesticity. We highlight structural analyses of the demographic and socio‐economic shifts that propel women's migration while also attending to the affective dimension of migrant women's desires and duties and to the brokerages that mediate the migrant flow. We finally examine how migrant wives and domestic workers contest the boundary of citizenship as they claim their full personhood against divergent modes of control over their rights, bodies, and mobility. We conclude by pointing out concrete areas where the two sets of literature can enrich each other for future research on gender, labor, and migration.

No abstract