Call for Papers* Symposium “Intersectionality and Politics”

*Call for Papers*
Symposium
“Intersectionality and Politics”
The question of the articulation of social relations of gender and class was first raised in the
1970s in France by the materialist feminists in terms of consubstantiality and coextensivity
(Kergoat 1978). Inscribed in the legacy of the black feminist movement of the 1970s (Hull,
Smith & Scott 1982; Davis 1983), the term intersectionality was coined across the Atlantic in
1989 by the American jurist Kimberly Crenshaw. It refers to the multidimensionality of black
women’s experience of subordination within the civil rights movement as well as in antidiscriminatory jurisprudence.
From the beginning, the concept of intersectionality had a double aim (Crenshaw 1989). On the
one hand, it sought to critique the homogeneous standards of discrimination as defined by the
privileged members of the dominant group. On the other hand, it sought to propose an analytical
framework that would reveal the overlapping of race and gender in relationships of power.
Despite the centrality of racial discrimination and the influence of the American legal field in the
genesis of this term, intersectionality is now used in a larger sense to designate the overlapping
of numerous relationships of power including race, class, gender, age, ethnicity and religion in
the reproduction of inequalities (Bilge 2009). The combined use of these categories, however,
presents several limits: the risk of depoliticization by only considering them in a categorical
rather than a dynamic manner (like social relations); and the risk of abstraction and
dehistoricization by not considering them empirically (Chauvin & Jaunait 2012).
While we do not intend to decide between these different ways of conceptualizing the
articulation of social relations, we will use the term “political” in a more precise sense. We are
aware that intersectionality is an intrinsically and eminently political term – both as an academic
tool used to describe and analyze power relations, and in its reinvestment and reappropriation by
the militant sphere. If “all is political,” this symposium nonetheless intends to focus specifically
on the political sphere as an arena of confrontation between political forces, places of production,
and the hierarchicalization of different social relations, as well as focusing on the domain of
public action. This domain includes elected public officials and ministerial staff (elected
officials, party officials, members of ministerial cabinets and public functionaries) and the
institutions that structure them – the State, the Parliament, local governments, political parties,
etc. But the heteronomy of the political sphere also lends itself to the study of the members of
political parties, to unionists, special-interest groups, political journalists and electors who
participate in the definition of political issues.
Papers should ideally take one or more of the following approaches:
è Approach #1: Intersectionality and Political Personnel
Here, we solicit papers that analyze the trajectories (militant and/or partisan) of political
professionals (those who live by and for politics), and endeavor to reinscribe them within the
complexities of power relations. We intend to reinvest in classical questions of the social
sciences: who are the members of the political personnel? What forms of capital – economic,
social, scholarly, and corporeal – are necessary to a political career, and how do they overlap? If
a white, cisgender, heterosexual man of the middle/upper class – an identity that is, by definition,
intersectional – corresponds to a political norm (which can be either confirmed or contested),
what about those who are racialized, trans, of a lower class, gay, lesbian, bi, and/or handicapped?
Does belonging to one or more of these categories constitute a stigmatization, resulting in
discriminations that hinder the accumulation of political capital, or can this stigma be overcome?
One might consider the recurring denunciations of the “gay agenda” on the fringes of the
political sphere, said to function by cooptation and to favor access of homosexuals (especially
gay men) to positions of power. At the same time, the promotion in politics of “diversity” on the
one hand and of “parity” on the other has serious implications in terms of gender and class for
the former, and of race and class for the latter: who are the “diverse” individuals/the women who
succeed in making a political career? Does belonging to a (gender/racial) minority alter the
significance of other minority identities (for example, being poorly equipped in educational
capital)?
è Approach #2: Intersectionality and Collective Mobilizations
Papers taking this approach should focus on different issues of intersectionality in conflicts and
social mobilizations. How does the prism of intersectionality take into account the militant
division of labor? Does a local usage of this term exist for certain militants? If not, who can lay
claim to this term, in what conditions is it possible to do so, and how is academic knowledge
translated within the cognitive framework of the entrepreneurs of mobilization? When
intersectional diversity is assumed within a minority social movement (labor, anti-racist,
feminist,...), what consequences does this have on their image and strategy? On the other hand,
is this intersectional dimension invisible or made to be invisible in the mobilizations of dominant
groups (for example, recently within the regulated liberal professions)? Finally, what are the
political and social conditions of convergence in minority struggles? For example, what leads
LGBT movements to join with the Palestinian cause, or “traditional” trade unions to support the
cause of sexual minorities, and what discourses do they mobilize to justify this convergence?
è Approach #3: Intersectionality and Public Action
Finally, papers can approach the articulation of the relationship between intersectionality and
politics from the point of view of public action. Just as the 1990s saw an increase in the number
of studies on gender and public policy, this approach is meant firstly to encourage reflection on
the “intersectionality of public policy” at different stages of its production and implementation.
In what ways does public policy contribute to the production of hierarchical social systems?
Above and beyond the universalism often associated with public action and the production of
laws, how can we analyze certain political decisions that implicitly target categories situated at
the crossroads of several relationships of domination? For example, what were the methods of
enforcement and the reception of the “law of religious symbols in French public schools” (2004)
or, more recently, of the “law prohibiting the concealment of the face in public” (2010) in
France? Secondly, this approach should offer examination of the eventual political uses of the
notion of intersectionality, or of expressions containing an analogous meaning. How do agents
of the State and political personnel make use of this term? Is this term used at the price of its
depoliticization?
Naturally, we remain open to other uses of the term “political,” as long as they rely on fieldwork
(ethnography, archival work, quantitative methods). In effect, the concept of intersectionality is
often approached in a theoretical fashion, and its empirical implementation is not always
evident1. In addition, papers proposing a methodological reflection in line with the theme of the
symposium (the multipositionality of the researcher) are also welcome.
Paper proposals may relate to different national contexts but must imperatively focus on the
contemporary era (19th, 20th and 21st centuries). They must be written either in French or
English, and must be no longer than 5000 characters. They must clearly indicate the chosen
empirical/methodological framework as well as the principal results that will be presented. They
must be sent to the organizing committee of the symposium before the 1st of January, 2016, at
the following address: [email protected].
The symposium will take place at the end of May/beginning of June, 2016.
We encourage submissions from researchers in disciplines across the humanities and social
sciences, and we will pay particular attention to proposals from doctoral students and young
doctors.
Organizing Committee :
Ranime Alsheltawy, doctoral student, Paris IX-Dauphine/IRISSO.
Hugo Bouvard, doctoral student, Paris IX-Dauphine/IRISSO.
Simon Massei, doctoral student, Paris I-Panthéon Sorbonne/CESSP.
Scientific Committee:
Catherine Achin, Paris 9 Dauphine/IRISSO
Laure Bereni, CNRS, CMH
Isabelle Clair, CNRS, CRESPPA-GTM
Eric Fassin, Paris 8/EXPERICE
Nacira Guénif-Souilamas, Paris 8/EXPERICE
Alexandre Jaunait, Université de Poitiers/ CECOJI
Sandrine Lévêque, Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne/CESSP-CRPS
Frédérique Matonti, Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne/CESSP-CRPS
1
See, for example, the notable reflections begun during the symposium “L’intersectionnalité en pratiques :
disciplines, methods et enquêtes” (“Intersectionality in Practice: Disciplines, Methods and Inquiries”), organized at
the INED on November 28, 2014:
https://www.ined.fr/fichier/s_rubrique/22065/programme.journee.intersection.fr.pdf
Bibliography :
Achin C., Dorlin E., Rennes J., « Capital corporel identitaire et institution présidentielle :
réflexions sur les processus d'incarnation des rôles politiques », Raisons politiques, 31, 2008,
pp. 5-17.
Achin C., Dorlin E., « Nicolas Sarkozy ou la masculinité mascarade du président », Raisons
politiques , 31, 2008, pp. 19-45.
Bilge S., « Théorisations féministes de l'intersectionnalité », Diogène, 2009, n° 225, pp. 7088.
Crenshaw K. W., « Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex. A Black Feminist
Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics »,
University of Chicago Law Forum, 1989, pp. 139-167.
Davis, A., Femmes, race et classe, Paris, Des Femmes, 1983.
Dorlin E. (dir.), Sexe, race, classe, pour une épistémologie de la domination, Paris, PUF,
2009.
Fassin E., « Des identités politiques. Jeux et enjeux du genre et de la race dans les primaires
démocrates aux États-Unis en 2008 », Raisons politiques, 31, 2008, pp. 65-79.
Fassin E. (dir.), « Les langages de l’intersectionnalité », Raisons politiques, 58 (2), 2015.
Fassin D., Fassin E., De la question sociale à la question raciale, Paris, La Découverte,
2009.
Faure S., Thin D., « Femmes des quartiers populaires, associations et politiques publiques »,
Politix, 78 (2), 2007, pp. 87-106.
Fillieule O., Roux P. (dir.), Le sexe du militantisme, Paris, Presses de Sciences Po, 2009, pp.
299-316.
Guénif-Souilamas N., Des beurettes aux descendantes d’immigrants nord-africains, Paris,
Grasset, 2000.
Haider-Markel D. P., Out and Running Gay and Lesbian Candidates, Elections, and Policy
Representation, Washington D.C., Georgetown University Press, 2010.
Hill Collins P., Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness and The Politics of
Empowerment, Routledge, New York, 1990.
Hull G., Smith B., Scott. P., But Some of Us Are Brave: All the Women Are White, All the
Blacks Are Men: Black Women's Studies , N.Y, The Feminist Press, 1982.
Jaunait A., Chauvin S., « “Représenter l'intersection”. Les théories de l'intersectionnalité à
l'épreuve des sciences sociales », Revue française de science politique, 2012, Vol. 62, pp. 520.
Kergoat D., « Ouvriers = ouvrières ? Propositions pour une articulation théorique de deux
variables : sexe et classe sociale », Critiques et l'économie politique, 5, 1978, p. 65-97.
Kergoat D., Se battre, disent-elles..., Paris, La Dispute, 2012.
Lovenduski J., Norris P., Political Recruitment : Gender, Race and Class in the British
Parliament, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Mazur A., MacBride Stetson D., Comparative state feminism, Londres, Sage, 1995.
Meuret-Campfort E., « Luttes de classes, conflits de genre : les ouvrières de Chantelle à
Nantes », Savoir/Agir, 12, 2010, pp. 43-50.
Pavard B., « “Je suis une anomalie statistique”, entretien avec Corinne Bouchoux, sénatrice
Europe Écologie Les Verts », Parlement[s], Revue d’histoire politique, 19 (1), 2013, pp. 125135.