**Embracing Intersectional Analysis: The Legacy of Anglo European Feminist Theory to Social Sciences-Humanities**

Xiana Sotelo *Francisco de Vitoria University, Madrid Spain* 

#### **1. Introduction**

218 Social Sciences and Cultural Studies – Issues of Language, Public Opinion, Education and Welfare

Nam Taehyun 2006. The Broken Promise of Democracy: Protest-Repression Dynamics in

Oberschall, Anthony R. 1994. "Rational Choice in Collective Protests." *Rationality and Society,* 

Oegema, Dirk and Bert Klandermans 1994. "Why Social Movements' Sympathizers do not

Olson, Mancur 1965. *The Logic of Collective Action.* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Olzak Susan and Johan L. Olivier 1998. "Racial Conflict and Protest in South Africa and the United States" *European Sociological Review*, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 255-278. Olzak Susan, Maya Baesley and Johan L. Olivier 2002. "The Impact of State Reforms on Protest in South Africa." Mobilization: An International Quarterly Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 27-50. Opp, Karl D. 1994. "Repression and Revolutionary Action in 1989." *Rationality and Society,* 

Opp, Karl D. and Wofgang Roehl. 1990. "Repression and Revolutionary Action: East

Opp, Karl D. and Christiane Gern 1993. "Dissident Groups, Personal Networks and

Rasler, Karen A. 1996. "Concessions, Repression, and Political Protest in the Iranian Revolution." *American Sociological Review,* Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 132-152. Seidman, Gay W 1994. *Manufacturing Militance: Workers' Movements in Brazil and South Africa* 

Suh, Doowon 2001. "How Do Political Opportunities Matter for Social Movements?:

Tarrow, Sidney 1983. "Struggling to Reform: Social Movements and Policy Change during

Tarrow Sidney 1989a. *Democracy and Disorder: Social Conflict, Protest and Politics in Italy*. New

Tarrow Sidney 1989b. "Struggle, Politics, and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movement,

Tarrow, Sidney 1991. *Struggle, Politics, and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movements and* 

Tsebelis George and John Spraque 1989. Coercion and revolution: Variation on a predatorprey model. *Mathematical and Computer Modeling,* Vol 12*,* pp: 547-549. White, Robert W. 1989. "From Peaceful Protest to Guerrilla War: Micromobilization of the Provisional Irish Republican Army." *American Journal of Sociology* 94: 1277-1302. Wright Teresa 1999. "State repression and student protest in contemporary China." *The* 

and Cycles of Protest." *Western Societies Papers,* No. 21, Ithaca: NY.

Tarrow, Sidney 1998. *Power in Movement.* Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, Charles 1978. *From Mobilization to Revolution.* New York: McGraw-Hill.

Tilly, Charles 2004. Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers. Tilly, Charles and Sidney Tarrow 2006. *Contentious Politics.* Boulder, CO: Paradigm

Spontaneous Cooperation: The East German Revolution of 1989." *American* 

Political Opportunity, Misframing, Pseudosuccess, and Pseudofailure" The

Vol. 6, pp. 79-100.

Vol. 59, pp. 703-722.

No. 6, pp. 101-138.

Germany in 1989. *Social Forces* 33: 175-198.

*Sociological Review,* Vol. 58, pp. 659-680.

York: Oxford University Press.

*China Quarterly,* Vol. 157, pp. 142-172.

Publishers.

*1970-1985.* Berkeley: University of California Press.

Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 437-460

Cycles of Protest. *Western Societies Paper,* No. 15, Ithica NY.

*Cycles of Protest*. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Korea 1990-1991. *Mobilization: An International Quarterly*, Vol. 11, No 4, pp. 427-442.

Participate: Erosion and Non-conversion of Support." *American Sociological Review*,

During the past forty years, Gender/Women's Studies has developed into a well-established interdisciplinary site on inquiry and academic knowledge production, challenging traditional discipline's understandings of women's experiences from a critical perspective. Critical research and teaching on gender/sex, gendered hegemonies, gender relations, gender identity and social categories is today carried out in universities in many countries all over the world. Consequently, is possible to speak of feminist studies as a specific academic field of knowledge production (see Lykee 2010; Berger and Guidroz 2009). Interdisciplinary since its very origins, is mostly non-traditional, allowing for new synergies and cross-disciplinary dialogues to emerge between heterogeneous fields of theory and methodology. On this ground, one of the driving forces among diverse viewpoints has been the articulation of the paradigm gender along with other categories such as class, ethnicity and sexuality. Indeed, there is a line of continuity implied in a strong challenge to traditional sciences on the grounds that the social/cultural/human sciences throughout their history have sustained and legitimized biologically determinist approaches to sexes and culturally essentialist perceptions of gender. Within this framework, I approach Gender/Women's studies as a "vibrant and developing transnational phenomenon and web of activity" (Lykke 2010; foreword).

Nonetheless, on the problem of theorizing women's experiences in an accurate, grounded and nuanced way, intersectional ways of thinking have a long and complicated history within academic Anglo-European feminist thought. Minority groups' claims of invisibility within a 'universal female gender' and against essentialist discourses of gender can be documented in the very origins of mainstream women's movement (see Garcia, 1997). However, long-standing clashes and misconceptions in regards to differences among women have resulted in one of the most fructiferous and insightful theoretical debates around the interlocking socio-cultural categories of gender that the Anglo-European academia has continuously witnessed over the past decades. Within this spirit, this chapter proposes a reading on the evolution and development of differences among women in a parallel movement towards intersectional analysis, to illustrate the historical and intellectual journey of an intersectional mindset, from its much disputed origins till its enthusiastic

Embracing Intersectional Analysis:

conclusion, and (9) references.

**2. Definitions of basic terminology** 

The Legacy of Anglo European Feminist Theory to Social Sciences-Humanities 221

In order to lay out the main representative voices and stages in this ongoing discussion about differences among women, around the interlocking categories of gender and its progressive adoption within Women's/Gender Studies, this chapter relays on critical reading of the most relevant texts in the cultural, literary, feminist circles and mostly, postcolonial thinking, at major historical junctures. Seeking this interest, I paid special attention to those texts which best articulated the destabilization of hegemonic discourses of gender and those unmarked aspects that are challenged or altered by women of color and postmodern/poststructuralist feminists' intervention. As part of an intercultural ongoing conversation is made up of pieces: some written as long ago as the XVII century, some as recent as 2010. I try to smooth over these discontinuities by highlighting a persistent

In presenting the main positions in feminist debates on epistemology, I would like to underline a pluralistic approach. Committed to a process of intense interdisciplinary debates, they present differential understandings of and intersections between discourses and gender embodiments. Epistemologically speaking, gender theories have been in critical dialogue with different strands of epistemological thought such as psychology, Marxism/socialism, structuralists and postmodern theories. Therefore, epistemological reflections intersect with many different types of postcolonial and anti-racist, postmodern/ post-structuralists debates on epistemologies. As a result, my own cartographies encompass a diversity of sub-positions. This plurality is motivated by the heterogeneity and diversity of voices and perspectives that characterize feminist theorizing of gender identity. At the same time, it is intended to underline that besides this diversity, there are overlaps and shared points between different epistemological positions. Indeed, with a general overview of Anglo European feminist methodology, I intend to demonstrate how feminist approaches to methodology have continuously engaged with debates in Western philosophy to raise critical questions about knowledge production. Moreover, I seek to show how gender theories have achieved a distinctive place in academic socio-cultural research within Social Sciences/Humanities. In order to do so, this chapter is organized into nine sections: (1) Introduction, (2) definitions of basic terminology, (2.1) subject-subjectivity-identity, (3) historical background, (4) Parallel counterparts: second-wave feminists vs. minority groups in the U.S ( 1960s-1970s), (5) differences that divide (1980s): hegemonic feminism vs. women of Color in the U.S./Third World Feminism, (5.1) dominant feminist theory as an imaginary Space, (5.2) the politics of location: the birth of intersectionality, (6) The Impact of Postmodern-Post-Structuralist Theories (1990s), (7) the intersectional approach, (8)

As much as gender relations are subjected to change, so it does their definition. Within this framework, I approach gender as a concept that specifies, marks out and layers together several historical moments. In one meaning, it will be referred to when all women were approached as interchangeably along the lines of sexual difference and essentialist womanhood. In another meaning, it refers to a time when women of color were increasingly present, with investments in specifying no parallel experiences. In addition, the impact of poststructuralist theories would turn the category of gender into a position of the subject in language that constitutes the subjectivity of the individual. Moreover, for postmodern

uneasiness among marginal voices within Anglo European feminist theory.

current reception in Anglo-European Women's/ Gender Studies, with the purpose to celebrate the interdisciplinary potential of a very transformative paradigm.

More specifically, from the decade of the 1980s, after the publication of the first women of color anthology in the U.S, *This Bridge Called My Back: Radical Writings by Women of Color*  (Moraga and Anzaldúa, 1981, 1983) a paradigm shift occurred thanks to their critical intervention. A well-documented political and literary movement most visible in the Anglo-European academy since the late 1980s, self-identified women of color in the U.S compromised both activists and scholars, from many diverse disciplines and backgrounds, first united with a clear vindication against a racist articulation of gender within mainstream feminisms. Dispelling the mantra of a 'unified sisterhood' as a primary explanatory force and arguing against additive analysis of 'race' and 'class' *This Bridge'*s contributors were enlarging the scope of gender analysis to ways never before anticipated. Indeed, the intersectional identities of *This Bridge* challenged traditional gender theories to articulate their own politics of location and 'situated knowledges' (Haraway 1988) in such a way they were forced to incorporate an interlocking understanding of socio-cultural categories. Interestingly, as we will see, in the decade of the 1990s intersectionality will be halted by the impact of postmodern/poststructuralist theories only to be revived again at the turn of the twentieth century.

On this ground, I wish to stress that contemporary gender theory and practice and their feminist epistemological positions are extraordinarily diverse. Gender studies, interdisciplinary by nature, are a very complex field to which many discourses contribute. However, it can be affirmed that the major paradigm swift that separates contemporary versions from earlier feminisms is a growing response to the demands for a politics of difference. The attention to difference and specificity led to an intense investigation of the production of gender identity which for women of color meant a greater focus on aspects other than gender that generate identity, for example class, ethnicity and sexuality. On the contrary, for postmodern and postructuralists it meant highlighting the discursive, linguistic and communicative processes that construct gender identity. Acknowledging the interdisciplinary nature of this research, I not only aim at describing an engagement with gender feminist theory, structuralism, postmodernism and other main intellectual fields of knowledge. I am particularly interested in giving a general overview of so-called 'intersectional approach', which caused and continues to produce, heated debate but nonetheless, it has undeniably radically altered the way gender research is conducted nowadays, in an interdisciplinary manner.

With the intention to give voice to an undergoing reexamination of the central tenets in gender theory I urge to emphasize that many attempts have been made to articulate 'intersectional identities' along the way. To this regards, I acknowledge and underline that many feminist discussions of intersections have been carried out under other names, using metaphors and frameworks other than intersectionality. To this regard, this study does not intend to provide one and only version of this intercultural debate, rather it aims at analyzing one particular instance of many others. It is intended therefore to capture a general sense, to provide a glimpse into a conversation through its most well-known and representative voices but with no purpose to map a definitive itinerary or one way argument.

current reception in Anglo-European Women's/ Gender Studies, with the purpose to

More specifically, from the decade of the 1980s, after the publication of the first women of color anthology in the U.S, *This Bridge Called My Back: Radical Writings by Women of Color*  (Moraga and Anzaldúa, 1981, 1983) a paradigm shift occurred thanks to their critical intervention. A well-documented political and literary movement most visible in the Anglo-European academy since the late 1980s, self-identified women of color in the U.S compromised both activists and scholars, from many diverse disciplines and backgrounds, first united with a clear vindication against a racist articulation of gender within mainstream feminisms. Dispelling the mantra of a 'unified sisterhood' as a primary explanatory force and arguing against additive analysis of 'race' and 'class' *This Bridge'*s contributors were enlarging the scope of gender analysis to ways never before anticipated. Indeed, the intersectional identities of *This Bridge* challenged traditional gender theories to articulate their own politics of location and 'situated knowledges' (Haraway 1988) in such a way they were forced to incorporate an interlocking understanding of socio-cultural categories. Interestingly, as we will see, in the decade of the 1990s intersectionality will be halted by the impact of postmodern/poststructuralist theories only to be revived again at the turn of the

On this ground, I wish to stress that contemporary gender theory and practice and their feminist epistemological positions are extraordinarily diverse. Gender studies, interdisciplinary by nature, are a very complex field to which many discourses contribute. However, it can be affirmed that the major paradigm swift that separates contemporary versions from earlier feminisms is a growing response to the demands for a politics of difference. The attention to difference and specificity led to an intense investigation of the production of gender identity which for women of color meant a greater focus on aspects other than gender that generate identity, for example class, ethnicity and sexuality. On the contrary, for postmodern and postructuralists it meant highlighting the discursive, linguistic and communicative processes that construct gender identity. Acknowledging the interdisciplinary nature of this research, I not only aim at describing an engagement with gender feminist theory, structuralism, postmodernism and other main intellectual fields of knowledge. I am particularly interested in giving a general overview of so-called 'intersectional approach', which caused and continues to produce, heated debate but nonetheless, it has undeniably radically altered the way gender research is conducted

With the intention to give voice to an undergoing reexamination of the central tenets in gender theory I urge to emphasize that many attempts have been made to articulate 'intersectional identities' along the way. To this regards, I acknowledge and underline that many feminist discussions of intersections have been carried out under other names, using metaphors and frameworks other than intersectionality. To this regard, this study does not intend to provide one and only version of this intercultural debate, rather it aims at analyzing one particular instance of many others. It is intended therefore to capture a general sense, to provide a glimpse into a conversation through its most well-known and representative voices but with no purpose to map a definitive itinerary or one way

celebrate the interdisciplinary potential of a very transformative paradigm.

twentieth century.

argument.

nowadays, in an interdisciplinary manner.

In order to lay out the main representative voices and stages in this ongoing discussion about differences among women, around the interlocking categories of gender and its progressive adoption within Women's/Gender Studies, this chapter relays on critical reading of the most relevant texts in the cultural, literary, feminist circles and mostly, postcolonial thinking, at major historical junctures. Seeking this interest, I paid special attention to those texts which best articulated the destabilization of hegemonic discourses of gender and those unmarked aspects that are challenged or altered by women of color and postmodern/poststructuralist feminists' intervention. As part of an intercultural ongoing conversation is made up of pieces: some written as long ago as the XVII century, some as recent as 2010. I try to smooth over these discontinuities by highlighting a persistent uneasiness among marginal voices within Anglo European feminist theory.

In presenting the main positions in feminist debates on epistemology, I would like to underline a pluralistic approach. Committed to a process of intense interdisciplinary debates, they present differential understandings of and intersections between discourses and gender embodiments. Epistemologically speaking, gender theories have been in critical dialogue with different strands of epistemological thought such as psychology, Marxism/socialism, structuralists and postmodern theories. Therefore, epistemological reflections intersect with many different types of postcolonial and anti-racist, postmodern/ post-structuralists debates on epistemologies. As a result, my own cartographies encompass a diversity of sub-positions. This plurality is motivated by the heterogeneity and diversity of voices and perspectives that characterize feminist theorizing of gender identity. At the same time, it is intended to underline that besides this diversity, there are overlaps and shared points between different epistemological positions. Indeed, with a general overview of Anglo European feminist methodology, I intend to demonstrate how feminist approaches to methodology have continuously engaged with debates in Western philosophy to raise critical questions about knowledge production. Moreover, I seek to show how gender theories have achieved a distinctive place in academic socio-cultural research within Social Sciences/Humanities. In order to do so, this chapter is organized into nine sections: (1) Introduction, (2) definitions of basic terminology, (2.1) subject-subjectivity-identity, (3) historical background, (4) Parallel counterparts: second-wave feminists vs. minority groups in the U.S ( 1960s-1970s), (5) differences that divide (1980s): hegemonic feminism vs. women of Color in the U.S./Third World Feminism, (5.1) dominant feminist theory as an imaginary Space, (5.2) the politics of location: the birth of intersectionality, (6) The Impact of Postmodern-Post-Structuralist Theories (1990s), (7) the intersectional approach, (8) conclusion, and (9) references.
