Intersectionality

The aim of the seminar is to learn about and examine theoretical concepts of integration and social cohesion as well as best practice solutions. In order to critically engage with these topics, it is also necessary to critically examine the conditions of inequality and oppression. For this reason, I will introduce the concept of intersectionality below, as it allows social categories such as gender, ethnicity, nation or class to be conceptualised not only in isolation from one another, but also in their interconnections. This is not simply a matter of taking multiple social categories into account, but rather of analysing their mutual interactions.

Intersectionality theory

The American lawyer Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term intersectionality in the 1980s. She used a traffic intersection as a metaphor to illustrate how different categories of discrimination overlap and form an intersection.

‘Discrimination, like traffic through an intersection, may flow in one direction, and it may flow in another [...] if a black woman is harmed because she is in the intersection, her injury could result from sex discrimination or race discrimination.’ (Crenshaw 1989: 149)

In Crenshaw's considerations, the individual categories of discrimination are ignored and the overlap, i.e. the intersection, is placed at the centre of her analysis. The complexity of power and power relations are examined within the framework of her intersectionality theory. The concept of intersectionality is therefore based on the idea that social categories, power structures and factors of discrimination are intertwined and interact with each other.

Today, in addition to Crenshaw's concept of intersectionality, other ideas have developed that also deal with the intersections of discrimination. All these approaches address processes of linking and interweaving categorisations. The principle underlying all these approaches is that categorisation structures can never be defined as independent of one another, but rather overlap and are mutually dependent (Binder/ Hess 2011: 16).

Katharina Walgenbach illustrates the overlap between gender, ethnicity, nation and/or class in her approach to intersectionality. She emphasises that the interrelationships between these social categories must be taken into account when analysing intersectionality (cf. Walgenbach: 2012). She defines intersectionality as a common frame of reference that integrates the various approaches, social categories and levels of analysis (cf. Walgenbach: 2012).

Nina Degele and Gabriele Winker take a multi-level approach. Within capitalist societies, this multi-level approach defines the structural categories of class, gender, race and body as power relations (cf. Degele/Winker 2010). They emphasise that the decision in favour of one category or another always depends on the object under investigation and the chosen level of investigation (Degele/Winker 2010: 16). It is never a question of addition, but rather of the intersection of categories of inequality (Degele/Winker 2010: 14). In order to answer the question of which categories are relevant to the concept and how the overlaps between these categories are to be analysed, the authors consider three levels. The macro and meso levels refer to social structures, processes of identity formation at the micro level and the cultural symbols of the representation level (Degele/Winker 2010: 18). They define gender as a structural category at the macro and meso levels and thus understand it as a cause of social inequality. This social inequality is reflected in almost all areas of society, such as the employment system, the political sphere, citizenship status and private relationships (Degele/Winker 2010: 19). Reference is made to the process of identification at the micro level (Degele/Winker 2010: 20). Together with other categories such as religion or occupation, gender is seen here as a category through which people define themselves (Degele/Winker 2010: 20). At the representation level, the importance of shared values, ideas and concerns that are collectively shared is emphasised (Degele/Winker 2010: 21). At the structural level, Degele and Winker define four categories – class, gender, race and body – which they use to analyse structural power relations. However, they also point out that a wider range of categories needs to be examined in order to do justice to the complex power relations that exist in reality (Degele/Winker 2010: 68). In addition, their intersectionality model advocates the overlap of inductive and deductive analyses, and it must always be taken into account that the different levels also interact with each other.

In addition to the model developed by Degele and Winker, Leslie McCall also distinguishes between three different approaches to analysing intersectionality (McCall 2005: 1773). Anticategorial complexity, her first approach, is based on a methodology that aims to deconstruct analytical categories. McCall points out that human social life is too complex to be captured in specific categories (McCall 2005: 1773). The approach of intercategorial complexity, in contrast, draws on existing categories of analysis to document inequalities within social groups (McCall 2005: 1773). Intracategorial complexity is the approach that methodologically stands between the two previous approaches (McCall 2005: 1773). Crucial to McCall's theory is that her approaches do not compete with each other, but rather take on their specific meaning and relevance depending on the question at hand. Through their focus on categories, inter-categorical approaches pursue the practical research goal of reducing empirical complexity, thus enabling statements with a correspondingly limited scope. Anti-categorical approaches are used to deconstruct attribution processes (McCall 2005: 1773).

An intersectional perspective thus makes it possible to recognise and include diverse relationships of inequality and oppression that cannot be explained by individual categories.

Bibliography

Crenshaw, Kimberlé (1989): Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex, in: The University of Chicago Legal Forum (1): 139–167.

Degele, Nina /Winker, Gabriele (2010): Intersectionality. An analysis of social inequalities. Bielefeld: transcript-Verlag.

McCall, Leslie (2005): The Complexity of Intersectionality, in: Sings, 30 (3) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Walgenbach, Katharina (2012): Intersectionality – an introduction. Available online at: http://portal-intersektionalitaet.de/startseite/ (01.09.2022).