Intersectionality beyond feminism? Some methodological and epistemological considerations for research

ABSTRACT

This article aims to extend the discussions that confront the intersectionality of Black American feminists to the ‘consubstantiality of social relations’ espoused by French materialist feminists. It proposes to do so by moving away from this ‘geo-cultural’ territory in order to better anchor the reflection in an epistemological and methodological ground. In order to do this, the article begins with some contributions and controversies of the intersectional approach to the renewal of feminist theories, and then addresses the issues that this renewal raises to the approach of consubstantiality. It then situates the approaches of intersectionality and of consubstantiality on the same epistemological continuum to discuss the middle way unlocked by the intersectionality of Black feminists. Finally, the effects of knowledge of this third way are examined.

KEYWORDS:

• Intersectionality
• consubstantiality
• epistemology
• feminism
• ethnic and migration studies

Acknowledgements

This is the revised version of a paper originally delivered at the working session on Intersectionality organized by the Séminaire permanent ‘Migrations & Travail’ (MIGTRAV), Laboratoire d’Économie et de Sociologie du Travail (LEST UMR 7317), Aix-Marseille Université, on January 5, 2017. I thank the participants at the working session for their questions and comments. I also thank Mustapha El Miri, Dahlia Namian and Albena Tcholakova for their precious and detailed critique and suggestions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Stéphanie Garneau is a sociologist, professor at the School of Social Work at the University of Ottawa. She is doing research in the fields of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Education and Youth Research. She has published several articles on methodological and epistemological issues. Her most recent book is Erving Goffman et le travail social (University of Ottawa Press, 2017), together with Dahlia Namian.

Notes

1 Hence it is understood that the social divisions of class, gender, and race are inseparable and irreducible, and that the organization of material production must undoubtedly be placed at the heart of the analysis. In French, the term used is ‘rapport social’ – the emphasis being placed at the structural level – and is distinguished from ‘relation sociale’ – meaning interpersonal relationships or interactions. This distinction between structures and interpersonal relationships being central to my purpose, I will translate ‘rapports sociaux’ into ‘social relations’ or ‘social division’ and will translate ‘relations sociales’ into ‘interactions.’

2 Many works make this comparison. For example, see Cahiers du genre (2005) and Revue ¿Interrogations(2015), as well as the following articles: Poiret, 2005; Jaunait and Chauvin, 2012; Ait Ben Lmadani and Moujoud, 2012; Lénel and Martin, 2012; Maillé, 2014; Chauvin and Jaunait, 2015.

3 In 2009 (p. 116), Kergoat wrote: ‘I would say, then, that the contribution of these anglophone research works is not, for France, the discovery of a radical novelty as some would like to believe. But more importantly, to allow the re-actualization and re-visibility of theories and concepts that have been marginalized in the academic field.’ Later, she quotes Juteau (2010), saying that it was the term ‘articulate’ that was used in the 1970s by materialistic feminists (Galerand & Kergoat, 2014, p. 47).

4 I think about issues of race and racism because this is the subject I know best, but one could also discuss gender identities/cisnormativity (Baril, 2017), linguistic identities/anglonormativity (Baril, 2017) or sexual identities/heteronormativity (Clair, 2013).

5 See, for example, Blais et al. (2007, pp. 148–150), who readily demonstrate that radical feminism in Quebec has sought in the past to articulate gender and class, but has had much more difficultly doing so with gender and race. In the latter case, in fact, the authors reflect more in terms of analogy than in terms of intersection. Moreover, they place on an equal footing the struggle for the national independence of Quebec and anti-colonial struggles – making invisible at the same time the colonialism suffered by the Aboriginals and social relations of race internal to the province of Quebec.

6 Radical feminism considers male domination as the source of all dominations – the ‘last instance’ – while materialistic feminism traditionally strives to hold together analysis in terms of gender and class. See Epstein (1995), who brings together these two branches under the common banner of the ‘radical wing of feminism.’

7 See Atlantis (2017) and Nash (2017) for a discussion about that point. Nash (2011) calls for a disconnection between intersectionality and Black feminism, arguing that Black feminism has multiple and heterogeneous political traditions and is not reducible to intersectionality.