Not additive, not defined: mutual constitution in feminist intersectional studies

Feminist Theory 22 (4):575-604 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The term ‘mutual constitution’ appears with regularity in scholarship on intersectionality, but what does it mean? We could not easily answer this question in the usual way – by reading books and articles about it – because the term has not received direct, widespread or sustained engagement in feminist theory. This led us to analyse a wide range of feminist scholarship – the entire set of 379 articles in women’s studies journals that consider both intersectionality and mutual constitution – to determine whether there are patterns and commonalities in the ways this important theoretical term is used. Our analysis reveals that while there is widespread agreement that mutual constitution does not allow for an additive or binary approach, this is the only major point of shared understanding of this term. Scholars disagree over whether mutual constitution is, in fact, the same thing as intersectionality, and in practice, clusters of disciplines use the term with different norms and levels of precision. Because of the explanatory potential of this term in intersectional theory, we recommend on the basis of our analysis that social scientists reconsider the convention of asserting that entities such as race, class and gender are mutually constituted and borrow the methodological tools from feminist historians, literary critics and other humanists that would allow for a genuine determination and demonstration of when entities are mutually constituted.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,283

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

An Abductive Theory of Constitution.Michael Baumgartner & Lorenzo Casini - 2017 - Philosophy of Science 84 (2):214-233.
Quantum Mutual Entropy Defined by Liftings.Satoshi Iriyama & Masanori Ohya - 2011 - Foundations of Physics 41 (3):406-413.
Re-thinking Intersectionality.Jennifer C. Nash - 2008 - Feminist Review 89 (1):1-15.
Intersectionality and Feminist Politics.Nira Yuval-Davis - 2006 - European Journal of Women's Studies 13 (3):193-209.
Constitutive Relevance, Mutual Manipulability, and Fat-Handedness.Michael Baumgartner & Alexander Gebharter - 2016 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 67 (3):731-756.
From mutual manipulation to cognitive extension: Challenges and implications.Michael David Kirchhoff - 2017 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 16 (5):863–878.
How emotions shape feminist coalitions.Nancy Whittier - 2021 - European Journal of Women's Studies 28 (3):369-386.
What Is a Political Constitution?Graham Gee & Grégoire C. N. Webber - 2010 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 30 (2):273-299.
Loops, Constitution and Cognitive Extension.S. Orestis Palermos - 2014 - Cognitive Systems Research 27:25-41.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-12-21

Downloads
6 (#1,466,250)

6 months
2 (#1,206,195)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism.Elizabeth Grosz - 1994 - St. Leonards, NSW: Indiana University Press.
The Science Question in Feminism.Sandra Harding - 1988 - Hypatia 3 (1):157-168.
The Science Question in Feminism.Sandra Harding - 1988 - Synthese 76 (3):441-446.

View all 13 references / Add more references