How the ‘Culture’ in ‘Culturally and Linguistically Diverse’ Inhibits Intersectionality in Australia: A Study of Domestic Violence Policy and Services

ABSTRACT

In Australia, policy and services addressing gendered violence are increasingly taking up ‘intersectionality’ as a concept to better include refugee and migrant women’s needs and interests. Drawing on critical policy analysis and interviews with front-line workers from domestic violence, refugee resettlement, and migrant-specific services, this article examines intersectionality in policies and services. It shows that so far, most policies and practices fail to acknowledge racism and other structures that exclude refugee and migrant women. We argue that the way culture is defined and deployed in policy and practice contributes to racism and exclusion, and inhibits intersectionality. Specifically, the category of ‘Culturally and Linguistically Diverse’ (CALD) erases the experiences and needs of refugee and migrant women, and shores up the power of white-dominated mainstream organisations, views and processes. We show that via CALD, culture is essentialised, racialised, and conflated with difference. For intersectionality to gain traction, current notions of culture and diversity need to be rethought, and racism and white privilege need to be addressed.

KEYWORDS:

• Culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)
• intersectionality
• refugees
• domestic violence
• policy and services
• whiteness

Disclosure Statement

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Notes

1 We note that refugee and migrant women continue to be marginalised and largely absent from the draft National Plan 2022. We also note that the category CALD is not used, per se, however our critique of CALD, particularly the use of culture and diversity within it, remain relevant.

2 Ethics approval for this research was granted by the University of Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee A, approval number 2018000422.

3 Mainstream DV organisations offer services such as counselling; legal interventions; women’s shelters; and specialist programmes embedded in organisations that might focus on other issues, such as homelessness. DV organisations are often better resourced than CALD specific organisations. For example, one mainstream DV organisation, servicing a single city, had approximately 50 employees and numerous programmes. The CALD organisation in the same but serviced the entire state of Queensland (approximately 1.8 million square kilometres) and had 5 employees, focusing only on individual counselling and information and referral.

4 As semi-structured interviews, the interview schedule allowed for flexibility. The case study was presented to most participants, but not all due to time constraints. Occasionally the case study was used if conversation had stalled or if there was uncertainty from the interviewee.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Jenny Maturi

Jenny Maturi is postdoctoral research fellow in the Humanities and Social Sciences Faculty at the University of Queensland, Australia.

Jenny Munro

Jenny Munro is an anthropologist and a senior lecturer in the School of Social Sciences at the University of Queensland, Australia.