Intersectionality as buzzword

Abstract

Since its inception, the concept of `intersectionality' — the interaction of multiple identities and experiences of exclusion and subordination — has been heralded as one of the most important contributions to feminist scholarship. Despite its popularity, there has been considerable confusion concerning what the concept actually means and how it can or should be applied in feminist inquiry. In this article, I look at the phenomenon of intersectionality's spectacular success within contemporary feminist scholarship, as well as the uncertainties and confusion which it has generated. Drawing upon insights from the sociology of science, I shall show how and why intersectionality could become a feminist success story. I shall argue that, paradoxically, it is precisely the concept's alleged weaknesses — its ambiguity and open-endedness — that were the secrets to its success and, more generally, make it a good feminist theory.

The Intersections of Class, Gender, Sexuality and ‘Race’: The Political Economy of Gendered Violence

“…In addition, it acts as a sensitising concept for addressing the complexity of social relations (see Davis 2008 for the idea that it is a buzz word and Anthias 1998 for the view that it is an heuristic device).…”

“…see Knapp 2005;Davis 2008; Anthias 2013a and b), they provide an important corrective to essentialising identity constructs that homogenize social categories hailed by various dimensions of social life (e.g. ethnic subjects) and which do not attend to internal differentiations.…”

Nature-based solutions to address global societal challenges

“…6 For new concepts such as NbS to endure, there needs to be a clear and widely accepted understanding of the foundations on which they are established, including not only definitions and principles but also parameters and methodological frameworks to guide their application (Davis, 2008;Brandt et al, 2013). NbS still remains, for many, a general metaphor without sufficiently clear guidelines to enable effective operationalisation.…”

Récits et subjectivations politiques intersectionnelles transversales

“…Cet élargissement de la problématique et cette diffusion du concept s'expliquent, selon plusieurs (Knapp, 2005 ;Davis, 2008, entre autres), en fonction d'un « flou » théorique qui affaiblirait la cohérence et la profondeur de la perspective intersectionnelle, se transformant en une simple « formule » rituelle (buzzword) qu'il convient d'évoquer dans l'écono-mie politique des « théories voyageuses » (Knapp, 2005) 2 sans nécessaire-ment l'utiliser.…”

“…Ce n'est pas ici l'espace pour commenter en détail les débats et les défis du champ de l'intersectionnalité. D'autres, qui avaient beaucoup plus de compétences que moi à cet égard, l'ont déjà fait avec sagacité (voir, par exemple, Weber, 1998 ;Knapp, 2005 ;Yuval-Davis, 2006 ;Davis, 2008 ;Bilge, 2009). Je voudrais ici con centrer l'attention sur l'un des problèmes qui subsistent malgré le dépassement des approches monistes de la domination sociale, soit l'aporie du sujet et de la structure, aporie qui se décline dans une série de tensions entre les niveaux micro et macro-social (Bilge, 2009), de même qu'entre « postmodernes » et « structuralistes » ou entre symbolique et matériel (Yuval-Davis, 2006).…”